HomeMy WebLinkAboutJANUARY 28, 2003 AGENDACITY oiF VIRGINIA BEACH
"COMMUNITY FOR A LIFETIME"
CITY COUNCIL
WAYORMEYERA E OBERNDORFAi Large
LICE AIA YOR L UIS JOl ES Bavwde Dwrrct 4
WARG4RETL EURE CerrrcrydIL District 1
14RR} E DIE EL #iempw-ril!- Dr anci
REBA S McCL4NAN Base Hall Diwricr 3
R}CHARD 4 WDDOX Beach, District
JIM REEIT Princess Anne Drslrrcr 7
PETER W �CHMJDT At Large
RON A WLLA N1IEP 4 At Largt
R EA RY W7LSO % A r Large
bUIE� L. WOOD Lvnnhmen Drsrrrcr 5
ES K SPORE city Manager
�IE L LILLEY City Attorney
HODCFESSMITH MMC Cray Clerk
I CITY COUNCIL BRIEFING
A
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
January 28, 2003
E
RE DRIVE
Kal Kassir, Chairman, Shore Dnve Advisory Cornrnittee
CITY MANAGER'S R'S BRIEFINGS
CITY HALL BUILDING !
01 CO UR THOUSE DRIVE
VIRGINIA BEACH IIJRGIIVIA .73456 8005
PHONE (5 127 4303
FAX (57)4b5 9
E MAIL Crycnd x bgov co
- Conference Room - 2 O Ply I
E
MPY LAKE PLAN
Mary Cole, Acting Director, Department of Parks and Recreation
NTAI A OFFICE PARK ENHANCEMENTS
Steve Thompson, Chief Financial Officer
III REVIEW of AGENDA ITEMS
S
N CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS
INFORMAL SESSION
A CALL TO ORDER - Mayor Meyera F Obemdorf
- Conference Room - 4 00 PM
B ROLL CALL OF CrFY COUNCIL
C RECESS To CLOSED SESSION
II V1 FORMAL SESSION
A CALIF TO ORDER - Mayor Me rera E Oberndorf
INVOCATION Reverend W Samuel Walton
United Baptist Church
- Council Chamber - 6 00 PM II
C PLEDGE of ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERIC
D ELECTRONIC ROLL CALF, OF CITY COUNCIL
E CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION
F MINUTES
1 NFORMAL AND FORMAL SESSIONS January 1, 2003
G AGENDA FOR FORMAL SESSION
H PUBLIC HEARINGS
1 AGRICULTURAL RESERVE PROGRAM (ARP) - Ives Road
SCHOOL CAPITAL BUDGET - (Reversion Funds)
Amendment to the CIP
Renovations, replacement and site acquisition S7,493,278
1 PUBLIC COMMIENT
1 TRANSITION AREA MASTER PLAID
i ORDINANCES
Ordinance to AUTHORIZE the acquisition of anAgricultural Land Preservation (ARP)Easement
and the issuance of it's contract obligations in the maximum principal amount of 5278,411 to Bam,i
D and Paula W Knight on Ives Road, containing 106 72 acres
(DISTRICT 7 -PRINCESS ANNE)
2 Ordinance to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE a $] SU,OUO grant from the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) to the Fire Department re equipment and training support of thf
Urban Search and Rescue Team
Ordinance to AUTHORIZE ZE temporga encroachments into City -owned properties
TERRY COMPANIES FOUR, LLC re an existing pedestrian bridge in the Ci y'4i
drainage easement at wynd Crest Condominiums off Salem Road
(DISTRICT l - CEI TERVILLE
b JAMES R and JA.NICE P ANDERSON re constructing and maintaining a private pier
gangway and float into Lake Rudee at 3 Caribbean Avenue, Shadow Lawn Heights
(DISTRICT 6 -BEACH)
K PLANNING
1 Applications of KENNETH A HALL FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP for a
da.rconnnuance closure and abandonment
(DISTRICT 3 — ROSEHALL)
8,47 square foot of a portion ofPine Street and 1-264
b 13,927 square feet of a portion of Second Street between Poplar and Pine Streets
Staff Recommendation DENIAL
Planning Commission Recommendation APPROVAL
Application of H GORDON and ELIZA ETH IC HUEY and BERNICE T WILLIAMS
for the duc ntin pan a closure and abandonment of a 1 -foot alley on Lots E — H on 4 b Street
and Lots 180 -= 184 on " Street, conta mug 4,050 square feet
(DISTRICT 6 - BEACH)
Reconumendation APPROVAL
3 Application of BLUE HORSESHOE TATTOO TWO, LTD for a Conditional Use Permit re
a tattoo and body piercing studio at London Bndge Road and Bowlazid Parkway (513 London
Budge Road), contamung l 272 acres
(DISTRICT 6 --BEACH)
Recommendation
APPROVAL
4 Application of SANDRA SALLWEG fora Conditional Use Permit re home occupation (day
care) at DuBois Place and Jansen Way (2933 DuBois Place), containing 5,490 square feet
(DISTRICT 7 —PRINCESS ANNE) 11
Rcormendation
APPROVAL
S Ordinance to AMEND the City Zoning Ordinance (CZO) re dimensional requirementsfor
nonconforming lots in the R-SS Residential District
Staff Reeorr mendation
Planning Commission recommendation
L APPOINTMENTS
'I'lVfE1 TS
I' ' • MNMI : •
RESORT ADVISORY COMMISSION (RAQ
M UNFINISHED BUSINESS
N NEW BUSINESS
APPROVAL of ALTERNATE VERSION
DENIAL
ABSTRACT OF CIVIL CASES RESOLVED 4 November 2002
ADJOURNMENT
If you are physically disabled or visually impaired
and need assistance at thus meeting,
Please call the CITY CLERK'S OFFICE at 7-33
Rearmg impaired, call TDD only 7- 3 5
JDD - Telephonic Device for the Deaf)
Agenda 1 /21b
boy± com
I CITY COUNCIL BRIEFING
SHORE DRIVE
Rai Kas ir, Chairman, Shore Dn e Advisory Committee
u CITY MANAGER'S 'S BRIEFINGS
Conference Room - 2 00 PM
LAKE FLAN
Darr Cole, Acting Director, Department of Parks and Recreation
SENTRA OFFICE PARK ENHANCEMENTS
Steve Thompson, Chief Financial officer
III RE VIEW OF AGENDA ITEMS
IV CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS
INFORMAL SESSION - Conference Room - 4 00 PM
A CALL TO ORDER - Mayor Meyera E Oberndorf
DOLL CALIF OF CITY COUNCIL
C RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION
V1 FORMAL AL SESSION
- Council Chamber - 6 00 PM
CALL TO ORDER - Mayor Meyera E Obemdorf
E INVOCATION Reverend W Samuel Walton
United Baptist Church
C FLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
D ELECTRONIC ROIL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL,
E CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION
F AUNUTES
1 nTFRMAL AND FOR34AL SESSIONS January 14, 2003
G AGENDA FOR FORMAL SESSION
j
CERTIFICATION F CLOSED SESSION
VIR INIA BEACH CITY COUNCIL
WHEREAS The Virgirua Beach City Council convened into CLOSED SESSION,
pursuant to the affinnative vote recorded here and in accordance with the provisions of The
Virginia Freedom of Information Act, and,
WHEREAS Section 2 2-3712 of the Code of Virgnua requires a certification by the
go errung body that such Closed Session was conducted in conformity with Virguua Law
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED That the Virginia Beach City Council
hereby certifies that, to the best of each me er's knowledge, a onl public business matters
lawfully exempted from Open Meeting requirements by Virginia Law were discussed in Closed
Session to which this certification resolution applies, and, (b) only such public business matters
as were identified in the motion convening this Closed Session were heard, discussed or
considered by Virginia Beach City Council
H PUBLIC PARINGS
AGRICULTURAL RESERVE PROGRAM (ARP) - Ives Road
2 SCHOOL CAPITAL BUDGET - (Reversion Funds)
Amendment to the CIP
Renovations,, replacement and site acquisition
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY
OF INSTALLMENT PURCHASE AG REEME WS FOR THE
ACQUISITION f= DEVELOPMENT RiGHTS ON CERTAIN
PROPERTY BY THE
CITY OF VIR INIA BEACH VIR INIA
Notice is hereby given that the Crty Council of the Cfty of Virginia
Beach Virginia will hold a Public Hearing with respect to the execv
tron and delivery of Installment Purchase Agreements for the acquisi
tion of agricultural lartid preservation easements with respect to lands
located on Ives Road in the City of Virginia Beach Virgpnia pursuant
to Ordinance No 9 19 know as the Agricultural Lands Preserva-
tion Ordinance which establishes an agricultural reserve program for
the southern portion of the City aesignatea to (a) prornote and encour
age the Preservation of farmland (b) preserve open spaces and the
area s rural character (c) conserve ar�d protect erwironmentaffy lens,
tive resources W) reduce and defer the need for mafot infrastructure
improvements and We expenditure of public funds for such+ imorave-
ments and (e) assist in shaping the character direction and (iming of
comrnunrLy development Such easements will be purchased pursu
ant tc Installment Purchase Agreements for an aggregate estimated
maximum purchase price of 78 411 The City S obligation to pay
the purchase pace under the Instaliment Purchase Agreements is a
general obligation of the City and tine furl faith and credit and the
unlimited taxing power of the City wtli be irrevocably pledged to the
punctual payrnent of tyre purchase pace and the interest on the unpaid
pnncrpal balance of the purchase pace as and when the Same respec
lively become Cue aqd payable The Public Hearing which may be
continued or adjourned will be held by the City Council on January 28
003 at 6 DO p m in the Crty Council Chamber located on the 2na
floor of the City Hall Building 2401 Caur[.house Drive Virginia Beach
Virginia Any person interested in thm matter may appear and be
heard
17Y OF VIR INIA BEACH VIRGINIA
Ruth Hodges Smith MMC
City Clerk
Beacom January 12 and Janaury 1.9 2003 1008184
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Amendment to the FY 2002-03 Capital Budget
Supplemental appropriation of $7,493,278 in
School Reversion Funds to School Capital Projects
On Tuesday, January 28, 2003 the Council of the City of Virginia
Beach, Wgmia will hold a public hearing on a proposed amend-
ment to the FY 2042-2003 Capital Budget The amendment
seall be for supplemental appropriation of $7 493,278 in Virginia
Beach School Reversion Funds to the following School caprtal
projects Bayside Middle School Twenty Classroom Addition
School Site Acquisitions {elementary school adjacent to
Newtown Road Elementary School and new Virginia Beach
Middle School Site} Arrowhead Elementary School
Replacement and Renovations and Replacement of Bus
Garage Facilities and/or site acquisition This is consistent with
the use designated by the City Council and School Board ,n the
approved FY 2002-2043 /FY 2007-2008 Capital Improvement
Program A copy of the proposed ordinance that provides more
details about the amounts of the appropriation for each project
is on file in the City Clerk's Office
The public hearing will be conducted at 6 OQ p m in Counctl
Chamber on the second floor of the City Hall Building, Municipal
Center Virginia Beach, Virgirnc% Interested persons may appear
at such time and place to present their views Individuals desir-
ing to provide oral or written comments may do so by contacting
the City Clerk's office at 427-4303 If you are physically dis-
abled, or hearing or visually impaired, and you need assistance
at this meeting please calf 427-4305 Voice/TDD
Rath Hodges Smith MMC
City clerk
PUBLIC COMMENT
TRANSITION N AREA MASTER PLAN
I ORDINANCES
1 Ordinance to AUTHORIZE the acquisition o f an Agricultural Land Preservation (ARP)Easement
and the issuance of it's contract obligations in the maximum principal amount of $278,411 to
BARRY D and PAULA W KNIGHT on Ives Road, containing 106 72 acres
(DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE)
2 Ordinance to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE a $150,000 grant from the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (IFEMA) to the Fire Department re equipment and training support of the
Urban Search and Rescue Team
Ordinance to AUTHORIZE mr encroachments into City -owned properties
a TERRY COMPANIES FOUR, LLC re an existing pedestrian bridge in the City's
drainage easement at Wynd Crest Condominiums off Salem Road
(DISTRICT 1 - CENTERVILLE)
b JAMES R and JAIVICE P ANDERSON re constructing and maintaining a private pier
gangway and float into Lake Rudee at 3 Canbbean Avenue, Shadow Lawn Heights
(DISTRICT 6 —BEACH)
a
r wo
.4
r10
J.-
cc
� -P
L
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGEN-DA ITEM
ITEM An Ordinance Authorizing the Acquisition of an Agricultural Land
Preservation Easement and the Issuance by the City of its Contract
Obligations in the Maximum Amount of $278 411 (Property of Barry D and
Paula W Knight)
MEETING DATE January 28 2003
■ Background In May, 1995 the Agricultural Lands Preservation Ordinance (the
Ordinance) was adopted by the City Council for the purpose of promoting and
encouraging the preservation of farmland in the rural southern portion of the City Under
the Agricultural Reserve Program established by the Ordinance, the City purchases the
development rights of eligible parcels of land leaving the fee simple ownership of the land
unchanged These purchases are embodied by perpetual agricultural land preservation
easements pursuant to which only agricultural uses as defined in the Ordinance are
allowed on the land
The subject property has been appraised by an independent appraiser retained by
the City The appraiser has determined the fair market value of the property, based upon
eighteen (18) comparable sales From the fair market value the value of the development
rights has been determined by subtracting $900 per acre, which has previously been
established as the farm value (i e value of the land restricted to agricultural uses) for land
throughout the southern rural area of the City The resulting amount is the value of the
development rights of the property
All offers by the City to purchase the development rights to property are expressly
made contingent upon the absence of any title defects or other conditions which in the
opinion of the City Aftorney, may adversely affect the City s interests, and other standard
contingencies
■ Considerations The subject property consists of one (1) parcel of land having
approximately 109 72 acres outside of marshland or swampland It is owned by Barry D
and Paula W Knight Under current development regulations there is a total development
potential of eleven (111) single-family dwelling building saes one (1) of which would be
reserved for future development Thus the preservation easement acquired by the City
would cover approximately 106 72 acres The site which is shown on the attached
Location Map is located on Ives Road in the District of Princess Anne The proposed
purchase price, as stated in the ordinance is $278 411 This price is the equivalent of
approximately $2 609 per acre of easement acquired
The terms of the proposed acquisition are that the City would pay interest only for
a period of 25 years, with the principal amount being due and payable 25 years from the
date of closing The interest rate to be paid by the City will be the greater of 4 00% per
annum or the per annurn rate which is equal to the yield on U S Treasury STRIPS
purchased by the City to fund its principal obligation under the Installment Purchase
Agreement not to exceed 6 00% without the further approval of the City Council
The proposed terms and conditions of the purchase of the Development Fights
pursuantto the Inst llm nt Pu rchase Agreement, including the purchase price and mann e r
of payment are fair and reasonable and in furtherance of the purposes of the Ordinance
0 Public Information The ordinance has been advertised by publication in a
newspaper having general circulation in the City once per week for two successive weeks
N Alternatives The City Council may decline to purchase the development rights t
the property
■ Recommendations Adoption of the ordinance and acquisition ofthe development
rights assuming all contingencies are met
■ Attachments Summaryof Material Terms of Installment Purchase Agreement (full
Agreement is on fide in the City Attorney s Office)
Recommended Action Adoption
Submitting DepartmentlAgency
City Manager I
Department of Agriculture
1 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF A
AGRICULTURTiL LAND PRESERVATION EASEMENT AND T -1E
ISSUANCE B THE CITY OF ITS CCO T1 ACT OBLI PTION IN
THE MAXIMUM PRINCIPAL TO JNT OF 2 7 ,11
5
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agricultural Lands Preservation
Ordinance � the " rdlnance"') f Appendix J of the Code of the
7
City of Vir in.,a Beach, there has been presented tO the City
Council a request for approval of an Installment Purchase
Agreement (the form and standard provisions of which have been
10
preqiously approved by the malty o n �I, a summary of the
11
material terms of which is hereto attached, and a true .-opy
12
of which is on file in the Citv Ptt rnev' Office) for the
13
acquisition of the Development Rights It (as defined in the
14
Installment Purchase Agreement) on certain property located in
1
the C-Land more fully e cr-be in E hi i : B of -.he
16
Installment Purchase Agreement for a purchase price of
1
, 411 and
18
WHEREAS, the aforesaid Development.-. Rights shall be
19
asqu�red through the acquisition of a perpetual agricultural
20
land preservation easement, as defined in, and in compliance
1
with, the requirements of the Ordinance, and
22
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the proposed terms
23
and ondltlon� of the purchase as evi-denced by the In tal� ent
24
Purchase Agreement,
25
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT o AINEL BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
26
CITY of VIR INIA BEPCH, VIR 11IA
27
I The City Council hereby, determines and finds that
2
the proposed terms and conaitions of the purchase -f the
29
Development Rights pursuant to the Installment Pur-.base
30
Agreement, including the purchase price and manner of payment,
31
are fair and reasonable and in furtherance of the purposes of
32
the Ordinance, and the City Manager or his designee is hereby
33
authorized to approve, upon or before the execLt i n and
34
delivery of the Installment Purchase Agreement, the rate of
35
interest to accrue on the upa-id principal balance of the
36
purchase price set forth hereinabove as the greater of 4
7
per annum or the per annum rate which is equal to the yield on
38
United states Treasury STRIPS purchased by the City to fund
39
such unpaid princ-,pal balane provided, however, that such
0
rate of interest shall not exceed 6 00% unless the approval of
41
the City Council by resolut-ors duly adopted is first obtained
42
The -ity Council hereby further determines that
3
funding is available for the acquisition of the Development
44
Rights pursuant to the Installment Purchase Agreement on the
45
terms and conditions set forth therein
46
3 The Cater canci-1 hereby expressly approves the
47
Installment Purchase Agreement and, sub]ect to the
48
determination of the City Attorney that there are no defects
49
1n title to the property or other restrictions or encumbrances
50
thereon which may, in the opinion of the City Attorne ,
1
adversely affect the Cit y's interests, authcrizes the C-it
52
Manager or his des-gnee to execute and dela-,7er the Installment
53
Purchase Agreement in sulDstartially the same form and
54
substance as approved hereby with such minor modifications,
55
insertions, completions or omissions which de not materially
6
alter the purchase price or manner of pair ent, as the City
7
Manager or his designee shall approve The City Council
58
further di.rets the City Clerk to affix ti-e Seal cf the City
59
to, and attest same on, the Installment Purchase Agreement
60
The City Council expressly authorizes the incurrence of E'he
61
indebtedness represented the issuance and delivery of the
62
Installment Purchase Agreement
63
4 The City Council hereby elect Zo issue the
6
-Lndebtedness under the Charter of the City rather than
65
pursuant to the Public Finance Act of 1991 and hereby
66
constitutes the indebtedness a conzractual obligation bearing
ring
67
the full faith and credit of the City
68
Adopted
by the
Council
of
the City of Virginia Beach,
6-0
on
thisdad
of
2U 3
3
70 Adoption requires an affirmative Grote of a ma]orit of
71 all members of the C-1tv Council
A871
arppurohasenightnightord wpd
F -1
January 7, 200
APPROVED AS To CONTENT
\6V
Agricu V
ure Departure t
PPPROVEp AS TO LEGAL
SUE'FICIENCY
.00
Law Department
APPROVED As 70 AVAILABILITZ OF FUND
r
n
t
Finance Department 7
21
AGRICULTURAL RESERVE PROGRAM
INSTALLMENT PURCHASE AGREEMENT NO 2001-52.ff
SUMMARY F MATERIAL TERMS
SELLER Barry D and Paula W Knight
PROPERTY LOCATION Ives Road
PURCHASE PRICE S278,411
EASEMENT AREA 1 acres more or less
DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL 11 single-family dwelling sites (10 acquired 1 reserved for
future development)
DURATION Perpetual
INTEREST RATE Equal to yield on U S Treasury STRIPS acquired by City to fund purchase
price, but not less than 4 00% (actual rate to be determined when STRIPS are purchased prior to
c ution of IPA) late may not exceed 6 00% without approval OfCity COLTnC11
TERMS Interest only twice per v ar for 25 v ar , with payment of principal due 25 years from
IPA date
RESTRICTIONS ON TRANSFER EPA ownership rnav not be transferred (except for Estate
Settlement Transfer) for one (1) year following execution and delivery of iPA
La
Ars
r�
ALA
eJ6. I 1
u r
{ -do
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM Federal Emergency Management Grant — USAR Amendment
lment
MEETING DATE January 28, 200
■ Background
The Federal Emergency Management Agency has awarded search and Fescue
Team, Virginia Task Force 2 an amendment to their Federal FY02 funding of
$150,000 These funds are for the development and maintenance of team
resources to provide qualified and competent US R personnel to support
activities under the Federal Response Plan These funds will continue fiscal
support for both equipment and training needs of the team
■ Considerations
This amendment provides continued funding under Cooperative Agreement No
EMW-2001-CA-017M003 This grant does not require a City match
■ Public Information
Public Information will be handled through the normal Council agenda process
■ Alternatives
Without accepting and appropriating these grant funds, it would be impossible to
maintain the City's FEMA► Urban search and Rescue sponsoring designation
■ Recommendations
Appropriate $150,000 for the ongoing maintenance and training of the FEI IA
Urban search and Rescue Team, A-TF
E Attachments
Federal Assistance Amendment Letter
Ordinance
Recommended Action Appropriate funds
Submitting Department/Agency Fire Department
City Manager IL ? pext
I AN ORDINANCE TO ACCEPT AND APPROPRIATE A
2 $150,000 GRANT FROM THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY
3 MANAGEMENT AGENCY FOR EQUIPMENT AND
4 TRAINING SUPPORT OF THE URBAN SEARCH AND
5 RESCUE TEAM
WHEREAS , the City of Virginia Beach Fire Department has
received an additional $150, 00 in federal funds from the Federal
Emergency Management Agency to support equipment and training needs
of the Urban Search and Rescue Team
10 NOW, TH REF RE , BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL of THE CITY OF
11 VIR INIA BEACH, VIR I IA
12 That a $150,000 federal grant from the Federal Emergency
13 Management Agency is hereby accepted and appropriated to the Fire
14 Department's FY 2 0 2 - 0 3 Operating Budget, with revenue increased
15 accordingly
16 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia
17 on the day of , 2003
A--723
data/noncode $1 0,000 grant ord w d
R3
January 17, 2003
Approved as to Content
Management Services
Approved as to Legal
Sufficiency
41 f
Department of Law
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Washington, D C 20472
September 7, 202
Mr Mark Pi land
Program ram Director, VA TF-2
1016 Timbemeck Hall
Chesapeake, VA 23320
Dear Mr Piland
We are pleased to inform you that your Application for Federal Assistance for fiscal year
2002 has been approved in the amount 1 0,000 Four copies of the award document,
FF 4 -21, for Cooperative Agreement No EMW-20 1-CA-0177 M003 are enclosed
Please sign, or have an authorized official sign, and return three (3) copies of the award
document to the address below as soon as possible
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Office of Financial Management
Grants Management Branch
00 C Street, SW, Room 3 50
Washington, DC 20472
Attn Lisa A Lewis
The fourth copy of the agreement is for your use pending receipt of the fully executed
COPY
The period of performance for this amendment, M3, is September 16, 2002 through
September 1 , 003 All other terms and conhtios outlined in your current Agreement
Articles remain in effect
Should you have any questions cancertung ttus award, please contact me at
(202) 646-4572
Sincerely,
f
-.
Lisa A. Lewis
Assistance Officer
Enclosures
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
ASSISTANCE AWARDAMENDMENT
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT GRANT
INSTRUMENT NUMBER 4 AMENDMENT NUMBER
EMW 2001 CA 0177 MD03
T RECIPIENT NAME AND ADDRESS
, Virginia Beach Fire De artmentcoote
Attm
ETA TF 2
Red
(ROD ooftLrk txv-6..
Virginia Beach VA 2345 f6f
11 AWARD IK AMENDMENT
EFFECTIVE DATE 6 CONTROL NU
See Block 21 1 W346479Y
8 ISSUIN IADMI ISTRATION OFFICE
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Financial Mgmt and Acquisition Div
Grants mgmt Branch Room 350
500 C Street S w
Washington DC 20472
Specialist Lisa A Lewis (02) 646 9572
RECIPIENT PROJECT MANAGER
10 FE1'1+IA PROJECT OFFICER
Mark Pi land (757) 615 2626
Wanda Casey (02 646 4013
i 1 ASSISTANCE ARRANGEMENT
12 PAYMENT MET1400
13 PAYMENT ENT FFti E
COST REIMBURSEMENT
� TREASURY C;HECK
Federal Emergency Management Agency
COST SHARING
REIMBURSEMENT
Accounting Services Division
Disbursement & Receivables Branch
L FIXED PRIDE
ADVANCE CHECK
SOD C Street S W Doom 723
OTHER
El LETTER OF CREDIT
Washington DC 20472
14 ASSISTANCE AMOUNT
16 ACCOUNTING -APPROPRIATION DATA
PREVIOUS AMOUNT
AMOUNT THIS ACTiON
TOTAL AMOUNT
$299 Goo 00
150 000 00
$449 60C 00
See Continuation Page
The purpose of this amendment M003 is to provide additiorYal funding for the development and maintenance
of National US&R Response System resources to be prepared to provide qualified and competent U &fit personnel
in support of ESF-9 activities under the Federal Response Plan Specifically this amendmenc adds 5150 000 00
in additional funding for FY 02 The period of performance for FY 02 is September 16 2002 through
September 15 2003
All other terms and conditions remain in effect
END AMEN10KE 'T
17 RECIPIENT REQUIREMENT
E RECIPIENT IS REGUIRED TO SIGN AND RETURN THREE (3) COPIES OF THIS DOCUMENT TO THE ISSUIN IADMIN OFFICE IN BLOCK B
Ej RECIPIENT I'PIENT IS NOT REQUIRED TO SIGN THIS DOCUMENT
IS RECIPIENT (Type name and bbe) 1 19 ASSISTANCE OFFICER (Type name and bt1e)
Gregory B Cade Sylvia A Carroll
Assistance Officer
20 ti=OFrrr DA 1 i REE � ISM OFFICE IDA�t
J4... � I
FIT► 40 R E I I F JUL 8�4 VIIFi I I L
i
14W- 01- - 17'7 M003
CONTINUATION PAGE
A. 1 PRICE/COST SCHEDULE
ITEM DESCRIPTION OF
NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES
0001
FUND I IG/ REQ NO 01
QTY UNIT UN I T
PRICE
1 Each $150,000 00
150,000 00 W34479
GRAND TOTAL - - -
ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA
ACRID APPROPRIATION REQUISITION UMBER
01 00 -0 -4 0AD-4500 --410I-D W346479Y P
$150,000 00
$I50,000 00
AMOUNT
$150,000 00
Page
1) � \ �, -1 �&- I c " ey"< 1, s A &- I V\l. P-3 4~1
AL a
I
e
4
I f
1..1
F � �
4
Lk 1
W w
_ Q
J Ll- U-
'"
-J
CP
Gt d
a
rx
v
A
y
-J W
LL
Ln ibn xm
LJ
COL. ew 2
rt
UD
z
W
WLi-O�
ZOO
Wp�Ce��u r
WCL. w
4 W:moo
W �
0 0
0 <�
k.J W W
w 4 0 66. < F-L
OC Lu tJJ
0 LU
Uwi Z L'i
D 0 Zac 61
La L
O
CC
m
LA
1..1
O
bik
4— zlj
C1'
I
1 �
1 � 1
n:
Lai
GD
z
M1
w
L
E�
F—
<
V)
LU
Lu
W,
u
0LU
N
1
u
L,
i
w
Ln
CL
wi
L"
V)6w La
_W F- 3 1 W
RX
C> WL.J RK
iLM m
W W r <
~ z
Ln
rV 2 zw
61 Irk z 00
F—�g
Kx,,�W
x� J
-JCL y+�La61a-
LM W � 0 �
{+ 0
a.it F c 4 'p W
pq
U CL 7 W
La w
6 �w� +
W 0 et � 4+
La ME u W 4I Jw4c3 2 W
0. xo ace a s u3
v
z
i
o
LN
M IsL
CL
g r. .,
43
z
G �
�J1
AC
z
0
L.LI
cry
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM Encroachment Request - The Terry Companies Four LLC
MEETING DATE January 28, 2003
■ Background The Terry Companies Four, LLC has requested to encroach into
city drainage easement, with an existing pedestrian bridge, for the purpose of
providing safe and direct access to a city park from the Wynd Crest Way
Condominiums The encroachment will not impact drainage, and serves as an
amen itr to community by providing safe, qu ick access to parry forthe neighborhood
The Development Plan has not been approved by the city but the encroachment
has been built The developer would life for it to remain
■ Considerations The applicant is requesting an after the fact encroachment
M Public Information Advertisement of Council s Agenda
E Alternatives Allow encroachment to remain or require removal
■ Recommendations Staff recommends approval of the encroachment subject to
conditions with attached agreement
■ Attachments Agreement, Picture, Location Map, and Ordinance
Recommended Action Approval
Submitting Department/Agency Public Works 8CK --.Of
City Manager t4 t 7y6n
I Requested by Department of Public Works
AN ORDINANCE To AUTHORIZE
TE M PO RARY ENCR ACHI LENT INTO A CITY
4 DRAINAGE EASEMENT BY THE TERRY
COMPANIES FOUR, LLC ITS HEIRS, ASSIGNS
AND SUCCESSORS IN TITLE
7 WHEREAS,
The Terry
Companies Four
LLC desires to maintain an eating
pedestrian bridge
upon the
City s easement
located adjacent to Wynd Crest
Condominiums off Salem Road
10 WHEREAS City Council is authorized pursuant to §§ 15 2-2009 and 1 -210
11 Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, to authorize temporary encroachments upon the
12 City's easement subject to such terms and conditions as Council may pres nbe
13 NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL of THE CITY OF
14 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA
15 That pursuant to the authont r and to the extent thereof contained in §§ 15 2-2009
16 and 15 2-210 , Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, The Terry Companies Four, LLC its
17 heirs, assigns and successors in title are authorized to construct and maintain a temporary
18 encroachment for an existing pedestrian bridge in the City's easement as shown on the
19 map entitled `BRIDGE PLAN of WYND CREST FOR o R DEVELOPMENT
0 KEMPS ILLE BOROUGH VIRGINIA BEACH a copy of which is attached as Exhibit A,
1 and
22 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the temporary encroachments are expressly
23 subject to these terms, conditions and criteria contained in the Agreement between the City
4 of Virginia Beach and The Terry Companies Four, LLC (the "Agreement'), which is
25 attached hereto and incorporated by reference, and
26 BE IT FURTHER F DAINED, that the City Manager er r his authorized designee i
7 hereby authorized to execute the Agreement, and
28 BE IT FURTHER F DAINED,, that this Ordinance shall not be in effect until such
33
4
36
35
38
9
4
41
4
43
44
time as The Terry Companies Four LLC. and the City Manager or his authorized designee
execute the Agreement
Adopted bythe Council ofthe city of Virginia Beach, Virginia on the day of
,200a
CA
PREPARED December 00
H \WP8T0 21L w on\ENclterryco ord wpd
APPROVED AS TO CONTENTS
SIGNATURE
Pry If&j CCZ I U
10)3WkZ10vT1:4 �w%'
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL
SUFFICIEN FORM
CI Y ATTORNEY
PREPARED BY VIRGINIA BEACH
CITY ATTORNEYS OFFICE
EXEMPTED FROM RECORDATION TAXES
UDDER S E TIONS 5 8 1-81 1 a
AN D 1 811 4) REIMBURSEME IT
AUTHORIZED UNDER SECTION
THIS AGREEMENT, made this c?b day 6a� , by and
between the CITY OF VIRGEqA BEACH, VIRG ]1A, a municipal corporation, Grantor "City ,
and THE TERRY COMPANrES FOUR, LLC ITS HEIRS, ASSIGNS AND SUCCESSORS IN
TITLE, `Grantee", even though more than one
W I T N E S S E T H
That, WHEREAS, the Grantee is the owner of that certain lot, tract, or parcel of land
designated and described as "PARCEL A 1 653 ACRES N LANDING RDA' and being further
designated and described as GIN 1475-75-7985, Virgirua Beach, Virginia,
WHEREAS, it is proposed by the Grantee to construct and maintain a Pedestrian
Bridge, "temporary Encroaclunent", in the City of Virginia Beach,
WHEREAS, in constructing and maintaining the Temporary Encroachment, it is
necessary that the Grantee encroach into a portion of an existing City drainage easement adjacent
to wynd Crest Condominiums off Salem Road "The Temporary Encroachment Area", and
WHEREAS, the Grantee has requested that the City permit a Temporary
Encroachment within The Encroachment Area
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the premises and of the benefits
accruing or to accrue to the Grantee and for the further consideration of One Dollar ($1 00), in hand
paid to the City, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the City doth grant to the Grantee
a
I i permission to use The Encroachment Area for the purpose of constructing and maintaining the
Temporary Encroachment
It is expressly understood and agreed that the Temporary Encroachment will be
constructed and maintained in accordance with the laws ofthe Commonwealth of Virginia and the
City of Virginia Beach, and in accordance with the Cit 's specifications and approval and is more
particularly descnhed as follows, to writ
A Temporary Encroachment into The Encroachment
Area as shown on that certain plat entitled "BRIDGE
PLAID OF WYND CREST FOR O&R
DEVELOPMENT KEMP VILLE BOROUGH
IRGEqIA BBACH11. a copy of w1uch 1s attached
hereto as Exhibit "A" and to w1uch reference is made
for a more particular description
It is wither expressly understood and agreed that the Temporary Encroachment herein
authorized terminates upon notice by the City to the Grantee, and that within thu-ty (30) days after
the notice is given, the Temporary Encroachment must be removed from The Encroachment Area
by the Grantee, and that the Grantee will hear all costs and expenses of such. removal
It is further expressly understood and agreed that the Grantee shall indemnify and hold
harmless the City, its agents and employees, from and against all claims, damages, losses and
expenses including reasonable attorneys fees in case it shall be necessary to file or defend an action
arising out of the location or existence of the Temporary Encroachment
It is further expressly understood and agreed that nothing herein contained shall be
f
construed to enlarge the permission and authonty to pennit the maintenance or construction of are
4, encroachment other than that specified herein and to the lirruted extent specified herein, nor to
permit the maintenance and construction of any encroachment by anyone other than the Grantee
2
It is further expressly understood and agreed that the Grantee agrees to maintain the
l
Temporary Encroachment so as not to become unsightly or a hazard �
It is further expressly understood and agreed that the Grantee must obtain a permit �
from the Office of Development Services Center/Planrung Department pnor to commencing any 1
construction within The Encroachment Area
It is further expressly understood and agreed that pnor to issuance of a right of way
penmt, the Grantee must post sureties, in accordance with their engiLneer's cost estimate., to the
Office of Development Services Center/Planning Department
It is farther expressly understood and agreed that the Grantee must obtain and beep
in force all-nsk property insurance and general liability or such insurance as is deemed necessary
by the City, and 0 insurance policies must name the City as additional named insured or loss
payee, as applicable The Grantee also agrees to carry comprehensive general liability insurance
in an arnount not less than o 0,000 0 o, combined single Iinuts o f such insurance po h cy or po liex es
The Grantee will provide endorsements providing at least tluriy (30) days written notice to the City
prior to the cancellation or termination of, or material change to, any of the insurance policies The
Grantee assumes all responsibilities and liabilities, vested or contingent, with relation to the
Temporary Encroachment �
r
It is further expressly understood and agreed that the Grantee connect with sanitary
sewer facilities when they become available, within the time stipulated her the City and that plans
must he submitted to the Department of Public Utilities for review �
It is further expressly understood and agreed that the grantee must submit for review �
and approval, a survey of The Encroachment Area, certified by a registered professional engineer
4
or a licensed land surveyor, and/or "gas built" plans of the Temporary Encroachment sealed by a
3
registered professional engineer, if required by either the City Engineer's Office or the Engineering
Division of the Public Utilities Department
It is further expressly understood and agreed that the City, upon revocation of such
authonty and penni ssion so granted, may rem ove the Temporary Encroachment and charge the cost
thereof to the Grantee, and collect the cost in any manner provided by law for the collection ol; local
or state taxes, may require the Grantee to remove the Temporary Encroachment, and pending such
removal, the City may charge the Grantee for the use of The Encroachment Area, the equivalent of
what would be the real property tax upon the land so occupied i f it were owned by the Grantee, and
if such removal shall not be made wittun the time ordered herein above by this Agreement, the City
may impose a penalty in the sum of One Hundred Dollazs ($100 00) per day for each and every day
that the Temporary Encroachment is allowed to continue thereafter, and may collect such
compensation and penalties in any manner provided by law for the collection oflocal or stag taxes
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said Terry Peterson has caused this Agreement to be
executed in its corporate name and on its behalf by its president Further, that the City of Virginia
Beach has caused this Agreement to be executed 1n its mine and on its behalf by its City Manager
and its seal be hereunto affixed ed rid attested by its City Clerk
(SEAL)
ATTEST
City Clerk
El
CITY of VIRGEqIA BEACH
y
City Manager/Authorized
Designee ofthe City Manager
kM
r
I
I
r
k
The Terry Compames Four LLC
f BY TERRY/PETERSON VENTURE TEN, L L0
Operating Manager #
i B
i
i
Operating Manager F
r f
M
STATE of VIRGINIA
CITY OF VII GEqA BEACK -wit
The foregoing m trument was acknowledged before me thus day of
0 , by , CITY MANAGER/AUTHORIZED DESIGNEE OF
THE CITY MANAGER
Notary Public
My Commission Expires
STATE OF VIRGE141A
CITY OF VIRxIMA BEACH,, to -wit
The I'oregomg instrument was acknowledged before me thus day of
�, �, by RUTH HODGES SMITH City Clerk for the CITY OF ' NIA BEACH
Nay Commission Expires
k
r
1
Notary Pubhc
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
C1TW9XMZ= of VIRGINIA BEACH � to -merit
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 20th I day of Sept
2 by 3 HN H PETERS GIB, JR , OPERATING I IANAGElto f The Terry Companies
Four, LLC
f Terry/Peterson Venture Ten, L L C operating Manager
It,." e , 'n�
Lary Public
My Commission Expires o 5
APPROVED AS T
LEGAL SUFFICIENCY
CITY ATTORNEY
Rev 07 24- 2
[�AAPPPYROVED AS TO CONTENT
( Z rM-cr
C 1as
OTY READ. ESTATE GENT
T
lLwr. '
We
ys,i� �.•, ' 4y, "' ' low',
OAK e-
IL or
ire} . �+ Y � � ' - _ ram• ^ • T�#� r •
IP
� + � its � �' { ' � � 'i■
06-099
AR
a W, ,.
it I
ref F' k ' ++� ■",
16
41
Pei
L4 W1*
IF
' ter.
! l •COIL-�y'y ' Y ' h�-a+ R� �i ��' r i r f" w� r� yam" } �+
�- •F . •.d6a+#` �.'Fib++" ,..r -- .■ y*-r _ Y �+ f ` * ` - ` - jr kp
NP
_ y r f* 1 �i< � 5 � � � _ _ � � •.^7 r S 3 _ r . . �f5
f IL
_;f•! r#•■ fJ i iy ■..it••-ti�w "Y 4'', �,nF#`�+`;
if
■. I'LOCATION
y
3 �
49
49
�I
Y
5w mom
M
�
416
q
ML
t
N
LOCATION MAP SHOWING
ENCROACHMENT REQUESTED BY
TERRY PETERSON RESIDENTIAL
INTO CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY
AT THE REAR OF
1688 WYND CREST WAY
scams ,^ = zoo'
PREPARED BY PAW EN . DRAFT Q-AUG-200
PROPOSED
PIER, GANGWAY LAKE RUDEE
AND FLOAT F CITY OF VIR INIA BEACH
^' 3 x16 PRFFAA ,
GANGWAY'-� �x I NN re
L3 S Q 37 18 VY 1690
L2 S 25 59 04 W 3450
41 IPF {,..0
D 40 z r L3 S 32 10 45 W 962
23
c�
rn
c L4 S 76 06 05 W 1000
pq
c
L5 6 48 09 48 W 1673
Exl
N�35355 W I IF PLAN VIEW
GPIN 2427-00-3818 CARIBBEAN AVENUE (50'R/W)
CO 2002 WATERFRONT CONSULTING INC ALL RIGHTS RESERVED SCALE 1 = 30
WATERFRONT ENCROACHMENT REQUEST
CONSULTING, INC PROPOSED PRIVATE PIER
FOR
1112 JENSEN DRIVE, STE 206 JAMES R AND JANICE P ANDERSON
VIRGINIA BEACH, VA 23451 LOT C RESUB LOTS 1 TEiRU 5 8UC 40 SHADOW LAWN HEIGHTS
PHONE (757) 425-8244 gE,acH oIsrRicr VfRGINIA BEACH va
FAX (757) 313-9788 (INST 1V0 200208203019175) DATE 3VOVEMBER 11 2002
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM Encroachment Request to construct and maintain a private pier, gangway and float for
James R Anderson and Jamie P Anderson husband and wife
MEETING DATE January 28 2003
■ Background
Mr and Mrs Anderson desire to construct and maintain a private pier gangway and float
at the rear of 3 Caribbean Avenue on Lake f udee The rear of the property has bulkhead
which the Department of Public Works supports to minimize and prevent soil loss along bank
slopes associated with open drainage ditch canal and lake systems
■ Considerations
City Staff has reviewed the requested encroachment and has recommended approval of
same subjected to certain conditions outlined in the agreement
There are encroachments of the same nature surrounding Lake l udee in Shadow Lawn
Heights where the Anderson s desire to construct their encroachment
■ Public Information
Advertisement of Crty Council
■ Altrnnres
Approve the encroachment as presented deny the encroachment or add conditions as
desired by City Council
■ Recommendations
Approve the request subject to the terms and conditions of the agreement
■ Attachments
Ordinance, Location flap Agreement Plat and Pictures
Recommended Acton Approval of the ordinance
Submrttma Department/Agency Public Works I Rea! Estate�v
City Manager V W�
3
4
5
6
9
1
11
12
1
14
1
1
17
1
1
20
21
2
2
24
Requested by Department of Public Works
All ORDINANCE TO AUTHORIZE TEMPORARY
ENCROACHMENTS INTO A PORTION OF CITY
PROPERTY ON LAKE RUDEE BY JAMES
ADERN AND JANICE P ADERSN,
ASSIGNS AND SUCCESSORS IN TITLE
WHEREAS, James R Anderson and Janice P Anderson,
husband and wife, desire to construct and mairtain a private pier,
gangway, and float into the City ' s property located at the rear of
Caribbean Avenue known as Lake Rudee
WHEREAS, City Council is authorized pursuant to §§ 15 2-
2009
and 15 2- 1 7 F Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, to
authorize a temporary encroachments upon the City' s property
rty
ub3 ect to such terms and conditions as Council may prescribe
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
F A I R I N IA BEACH r VIRGINIA
That pursuant to the authority and to the extent thereof
contained in §§ 15 2-2009 and 15 2-2107 , Code of Virginia, 1950, as
amended James R Anderson and Jan -ice P Anderson, assigns and
successors in title are authorized to construct and maintain a
temporary encroachment for a private pier, gangway, and float in
the City' s property as shown on the map entitled E N C ROAC HMEN T
REQUEST PROPOSED PRIVATE PIER FOR JAMES R AND JA.NI E P ANDERS N
LOT C, RESUB LOTS 1 THRU 5 , BLK 40f SHADOW LAWN H I HTS BEACH
5
26
8
29
1
32
3
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
1
4
43
44
45
4
47
8
49
so
51
014
DISTRICT VIRGINIA BEACH, VA INST NO 20 2 03 1917 ) DATE
NOVEMBER 11, 20 2", a copy of which is on fa -le in the Department of
Public Works and to which reference is made for a. more particular
description, and
BE IT FURTHER ORDPINED, that the temporary encroachment s
are expressly subDet to those terms, conda-tions and criteria
contained in the Agreement between the City of Virginia Beach and
James R Anderson and Janice P Anderson, (the "'Agreement") which
is attached hereto and incorporated by reference, and
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the City Manager or his
authorized designee is hereby authorized to execute the Agreement
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED, that this Ordinance shall not b
in effect until such time as Fames R Anderson and Janice P
Anderson and the City Manager or his authorized designee execute
the Agreement
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach,
Virginia, on the day of , 2003
CA-#
salmnsandrson/ord
-1
PREPARED 01 07 03
2
PROVED AS TO CONTENTS
V SIGNATURE
TM PeSR)
(!�A --
DEPARTMENT
APPROVED AS TO LEGAI,
SOF'FICIE C iD FORM
CITY ATTORNEY
PREPARED BY VIRGN A BEACH
CITY ATTORNEYS OFFICE
EXEWTED FROM RECORDATION TAXES
UNDER SECTIONS 58 1 811 a
AND 58 I - I I REMMURSEMENT
AUTHORIZED UNDER SEC70N 25-249
THIS AGREEMENT, made this �day of :) eeer, ?0p�, by and
between the CITY OF VIRG NIA BEACH, VIR INI A, a mumcipal corporation, Grantor, "City",
and JAMES R ANDERSON AND JAI iI E P AN ERS, husband and wife, THEIR HEIRS,
ASSIGNS AND SUCCESSORS S III TITLE, "Grantee', even though more than one
WITIIESSETH
That, WHEREAS,, the Grantee is the owner of that certain lot, tract, or parcel of land
designated and described as "LOT C" as shown on "RESUBDIVISION OF PROPERTY LOTS I
THRU 5 - BLOCK 40 SHADOW LAWN HEIGHTS N41B 7 P 14 VIRGINIA BEACH, VI GMA
SCALE I t'T ' .3NE 1 , 2002 '#, as recorded m Instrument Number 200208203 1 1 and bung
fi.rther designated and described 3 Caribbean Avenue, Virginia Beach, Virginm 23451,
WHEREAS, rt is proposed by the Grantee to construct and nzmtam a private pier,
gangway, and Moat ` 'e porary Encroaclunent", m the City of Virguua Bead,
WHEREAS, un constructing and maintaining the Temporary Encroachment, rt i
necessary that the Grantee encroach into a portion of ewstung City property at the rear of
Canbb an Avenue known as Lake l udee, `'The Temporary Encroachment Area", and
NHEREAS, the Grantee has requested that the City pem t a Temporary
Encroachment within The Encroachment Area
GPI 7- 0- 1 -o oo
NOW, THERE` RE, for and m consideration of the premmses and of the benefits
accruing or to accrue to the Grantee and for the further consideration of One Dollar ($1 00), m hand
paid to the City, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the City doth grant to the Grantee
perrmssion to use The Encroachment Area for the purpose of constructing and maintamng the
Temporary Encroachment
It is expressly understood and agreed that the Temporary Encroachment will be
constructed and mamtamed in accordance with the laws of the Commonwealth of Virg ua and the
City of Virgima Beach, and in accordance th the City's specifications and approval and is more
particularly described as follows, to wit
A Temporary Encroachment into The Encroachment
Area as shorn on that certarn plat entitled
"ENCROACHMENT REQUEST PROPOSED
PRIVATE PIER FOR JAMES R AND JANICE F
ANDERSON LOT C. RESUB LOTS I THRU 5,
LK 40, SHADOW LAWN HEIGHTS BEACH
DISTRICT VIRGINIA BEACH, VA INST No
2r00208203o 1 I DATE N VEI iBER I I, 2002 '",
a copy of whuch 1s attached hereto as Em it "A" are
to winch reference is made for a more particular
description
It is further expressly understood and agreed that. the Temporary EncToachment herein
authorized terninates upon notice by the City to the Grantee, and that wrth= thirty (30) days after
the notice is given, the Temporary Encroachment must he removed from The Encroachment Area
y the Grantee, and that the Grantee wffl bear all costs and expenses of such removal
It is further expressly understood and agreed that the Grantee shall mdemmfy and hold
harmless the City its agents and employees, from and against all la=, damages, losses and
expenses mcludrng reasonable attorneys fees in case it shall be necessary to file or defend an action
rLg out of the location or existence of the Temporary Encroachment
I
It 1s Sher expressly understood and agreed that nothing herein contartned shall be
construed to enlarge the perrnussion and authority to pernmt the maintenance or construction of any
encroachment other than that specified herein and to the hm ted extent specified herem, nor to penrut
the maintenance and construction of anyencroachment by anyone other than the Grantee
It is further expressly understood and agreed that the Grantee agrees to n xntain the
Temporary Encroachment so as not to becorne unsightly or a lard
It is further expressly understood and agreed that the Grantee must obtain a prrmt
from the Office of Development Services C nter Plana ng Department prior to coi nencrng any
construction within The Encroaclunent Area
It is wither expressly understood and agreed that prior to issuance of nght of'way
permit, the grantee must post sureties, m accordance with their engineer's cost estrrmte, to the
Office of Development Services Center/Plan- epartment
It is further expressly understood and agreed that the grantee must obtain and deep
m force all-nsl property m urance and general labihty or such insurance as is de need necessary by
the City, and all insurance poheles must name the City as additional named insured or loss payee,
s apphca le The Grantee also agrees to carry comprehensive general liability murance m an
arnount not less than $500,000 00, combined sm le lmnts of such insurance poky or policies The
Grantee wffl provide endorsements providing at least thzrty (30) days written notice to the City prior
to the cancellation or ternunation of, or rmteri l change to, any of the msu ranee policies The
Grantee assumes all response ilmes and lea it ties, vested or contingent, with relation to the
Temporary Encroachment
It is der expressly understood and agreed that the City, upon revocation
of such authority and passion so granted, may remove the Temporary Encroachment and charge
the cost thereof to the Grantee, and collect the cost m any manner pTovided bar law for the collection
of local or state taxes, may require the Grantee to remove the Temporary Encroachment, and
pending such removal, the City nmy charge the Grantee for the use of The Encroachment Area, the
equivalent of what would be the real property tax upon the land so occupied L.fit were owned by the
Grantee, and if such removal sha11 not be rmde within the time ordered herein above by this
Agreement, the City may unpose a penalty in the sum of One Hundred Dollars ($100 00) per day
for each and very day that the Temporary Encroachment is avowed to continue thereafter, and may
collect such compensation and penalties in any manner provided by law for the collection of local
r state taxes
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, James R Anderson and Janice P Anderson, husband and
wife, the said Grantee has caused this Agreement to be executed by their signature and sea] duly
affixed Further, that the City ofVuguna Beach has caused this Agreement to be executed in its
name and on its behalf by its City Manager and its seal be hereunto affixed and attested by rts City
Clerk
(SEAL)
ATTEST
City Clerk
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
By
City Manager/Authorized
Designee of the City Manager
...ireetc,
es R Anderson
Jame P Anderson
STATE OF VIRGINI
CITY of VIRGINIA BEACH, to -wit
The foregoing mtrument was acknowledged before me thus day of
3P--,by
THE CITY MANAGER
My Commission Expires
STATE OF VIRGINIA
CITY of VIRGfNIA BEACH to -wit
CITY MANAGER/AUTHORIZED DESIGI E of
Notary F bh
The foregoing mtment was acknowledged before me this day of
119 o � by RUTH HODGES SMITH, City Clerk for the CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
My Conumssion Expires
5
Notary Public
STATE OF V((
f'
I7" F" _-� `� to -wit
r
6--i
The forego ing nistrunt was acknowledged before rune this day of
20 by Jarnes R Anderson
I was originally commissioned as
Pamela T Stillman, Notary Public Notary Pub1
My Commmion Expires �( r�w)
STATE OF
CITE Off' r r , to
J !
The fore orn u stye t was acknowledgedbefore a the l� day of
s
by 3arnce P Anderson
I was originally commissioned
riotc, m la T Stillman, Notary Public
My Comnuion Expires
APPROVED AS TO
LEGAL SUFFICIENCY
CITY A TORTiEY
Rear 07 24 o
:a
Notary Pubb
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT
Q)qgr,, C O "r�
OTY REAL ESTATE AGENT
Northern properly line took east
Southern property line loolung east
i PLANNING
\ I
1 Applications of KENNETH A HALL FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP for a
discontinuance closure and abandonment
(DISTRrCT 3 — ROSEHALL)
a 8,487 square feet of a portion of Pine Street and I-264
b 131,927 square feet of a portion of Second Street between Poplar and Pine Streets
Application of H GORDON and ELIZABETH K HUEY and BERNICE T WILLIAMS
for the discontinuance closure and abandonment of a 1 -foot alley on Lots E — H on to Street
and Lots 180 — 184 on 49hStreet, containing 4,050 square feet
(DISTRICT -- BEACH)
3 Application of BLUE HORSESHOE TATTOO TWO, LTD for a Conditional Use Permit re
a tattoo and body piercing studio at London Bridge Road and Bowland Parkway (513 London
Bndge Road), containing 1 272 acres
(DISTRICT 6 —BEACH)
4 Application of SANDRA BALLWEG for a Conditional Use Permit re home occupation (day
care) at DuBois Place and Jansen Way (2933 DuBois Place), containing 5,490 square feet
(DISTRICT 7 —PRINCESS ANNE)
5 Ordinance to AMEND the City Zoning Ordinance (CZO) re dimensional requirements for
nonconforming lots in the R-SS Residential District
MIP
^N" T.", G' Kenneth A . Hall
Street Cksure — Portion of Ane Street
ZONING HISTORY
1 Street Closure -Granted 6/05/01
2 Conditional Use Permit (auto body shop) -Granted 6/05/01
3 Conditional Use Permit (communications tower) -Granted 1/23/96
4 Conditional Use Permit (auto sales) -Granted 8l11/96
5 Conditional Use Permit (auto sales and service) -Granted 10/13/86
6 Conditional Use Permit (auto paint) -Granted 5/1 9/86
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM Kenneth A Hall Family Limited Partnership — street Closures
MEETING DATE .January 28, 2003
N Background
Application of Kenneth A Hall Family Limited Partnership for the discontinu n
closure and abandonment of a portion of Pine Street beginning at the northern
boundary of 1-264 and running northerly a distance of approximately 140 83 feet
Said parcel contains 8,487 square feet
Application of Kenneth A Hall Family Limited Partnership for the discontinuance
closure and abandonment of a portion of Second Street between Poplar Street
and Pine Street and between Lots 8 and 16, Block 4 and Lots 1 and remains of
Lot 11, Block 10, Jack sondale Parcel is 50ieet in width and contains 13,927
square feet DISTRICT 3 — ROSE HALL
The purpose of this request is to close the subject portions of Pine and Second
Streets to resubdivide and consolidate numerous small parcels into a tract or
tracts which are more advantageous for economic development
■ considerations
In dune 2001, City Council approved a street closure similar to this request
located west of the subject site The streets approved for closure were portions
of Spruce Street and Second Street, west of Pine Street A condition of that
street closure was that an agreement would be recorded reserving the Cit 's right
to repurchase the rights -of -way within ten years The viewers are concerned that
granting additional street closures east of the recently approved street closures
of Spruce Street and Second Street would significantly reduce the options to
evaluate the relocation of Bonney Road as part of the interchange study
In addition to the street closure, a conditional use permit was approved for an
auto body shop on the property encompassing these streets The parking and
storage area for the body shop will be built on the undeveloped property crest of
Pine Street, the auto body shop building will be located further crest on the
property
The viewers have determined that the proposed street closures will result in a
public inconvenience and, therefore, should not be granted Improvements to the
Kenneth A Hall Family Partnership
Page 2 of
Rosemont Road/1-264 Interchange are currently being studied by VD T The
proposed street closures are directly in conflict with all four alternatives that
VDOT has developed for the proposed interchange improvements In addition,
the street closures are in conflict with an ongoing Public Works study to relocate
Bonney Road at this interchange The area being studied for the relocation of
Bonney Road is between Spruce Street and Rosemont Road The proposed
street closures are in the middle of this study area
The applicant has stated that positive economic development is the goal of this
street closure In the Little Neck area, consolidation of properties is encouraged
by the Comprehensive Plan policies However, the Comprehensive Plan also
recommends that development proposals on land located within the vicinity of the
1-264 interchanges concentrate on economically productive uses that are high
quality The applicant has not provided any details on the development plans for
the consolidated properties Any development plan of high quality should be well
coordinated with the future transportation needs at this interchange
The viewers contend that this request for street closures represents a piecemeal
approach to development that is not well coordinated with the future
transportation needs The strut closures requested will result in public burden
and inconvenience because they conflict with a II four alternatives currently
developed and also conflict with the ongoing Public Works study to relocate
Bonney Road at the time VD T interchange improvements are made The
viewers' recommendation is to deny this request for street closures of portions of
Pine Street and Second Street
Staff recommends denfal There was no opposition to the request
0 Recommendations
The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded Grote of -o with 1
abstention to approve this request with the following conditions
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 d t nnined 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
2 The applicant is required to resubdivide the property and vacate internal lot
lines to incorporate the closed area into the adjoining panels The plat must
be submitted and approved for recordation pnor to final street closure
approval
3 The applicant is required to provide public utility easements over existing
water and server facilities to the satisfaction of Public Utilities These
easements must be shown on the street closure plat
Kenneth A Hall Family Partnership
Page 3 of 3
The City reserves, for fifteen 1 5 years from the date of recordation of the
closures the right to repurchase the area of closure at the same price paid by
the applicant to the City plus a factor of 3% a year, without compensation for
any improvements or for damage to the residue of the applicants property
This repurchase right shall be included in the deed or in a separate
agreement to be recorded in the Clerk's office of the Circuit Court of the City
of Virginia Beach The deed or agreement shall be acceptable to the City
Attomey
5 The applicant is required to verity 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
Closure of the right -of -gray 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 -gray this
approval shall be considered null and void
■ Attachments
Ordinances
Staff Review
Disclosure Statement
Planning Commission Minutes
Location Map
Recommended Action Staff recommends denial Planning Commission recommends
approval
Submitting Department/Ancy Planng Departmen
City Manager STni
4W
ORDINANCE No
IN THE MATTER OF CLOSING VACATING AND
DISC NTINUrNG A PORTION F THAT CERTAIN
STREET KNOWN AS PfNE STREET AS SHOWN ON
THAT CERTAIN PLAT ENTITLEI "PLAT SLOWING
PROPOSED CLOSURE OF A PORTION OF SECOND
STREET RIGHT OF WAY "PLAT OF R SEM NT"
(MB'2� G 1 OCTO ER 2 2002, VIRGIMA BEACH,
VIRINIA,:
WHEREAS, on January 28, 2003, Kenneth A Hall Family Limited Partnership
applied to the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, to have the hereinafter described
street discontinued closed, and vacated and
WHEREAS, it is the judgment of the Council that said street be discontinued,
closed and vacated subject to certain conditions having been met on or before January 27 2004,
N, THEREFORE
SECTION I
E IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach Virginia., that
the hereinafter described street be discontinued closed and vacated, subject to certain conditions
being met on or before January 27, 2004
All that certain piece or parcel of land situate, lying and being in
the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, designated and described as
"PORTION OF SECOND STREET TO BE CLOSED .AREA =
13 644 SF OR 0 313 ACC" shown as the cross -hatched area on that
certain Plat entitled "PLAT SHOWING PROPOSED CLOSURE
OF A PORTION OF SECOND STREET RIGHT of WAY
"PLAT OF R SEM NT" MB 2, PG l OCTOBER 2 2002,
VIROYNIA BEACH, VIR xINIA, Scale 1 r'= o' Prepared by
MSA P C a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit
GPTN 1 47--1 1 , 14-3-, 14-3-04, and 1-3-21
SECTION II
The following conditions must be met on or before ore January 27 2004
1 The City Attorneys Office will make the final determination regarding
ownership ofthe underlying fee The purchase price to be paid to the City shall be determined
according to the "Policy Regarding Purchase of Ctt)'s Interest in Streets Pursuant to Street
Closures " approved by City Council Copies of said polio are a%vailable in the Planning
Department
The applicant shall reubdivide the property and vacate internal lot lines to
incorporate the closed area into the adjoining parcels The resubdivision plat shall be submitted
and approved for recordation prior to final street closure approval
The applicant is required to provide public utility easements over existing
water and sewer facilities to the satisfaction of Public Utilities These easements must be shown
on the street closure plat
The City reserves, for fifteen 1 gears from the date of recordation of the
closure, the nht to repurchase the area ofclosure at the same price paid by the applicant to the
City plus a factor of % a year, without compensation for any improvements or for damage to
the residue of the applicants' property This repurchase right shall be included in the deed or in
separate agreement to be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of
virgirua Beach The deed or agreement shall be acceptable to the City Attorney
5 The applicant shad verify that no private utilities exist within the right-of-way
proposed for closure Prelirnrnar comments from the utility companies indicate that there are
no private utilities within the nght-of-way proposed for closure If private utilities do exist the
applicant shall provide easements satisfactory to the utility companies
Closure of the right-of-way shall be contingent upon compliance with the
above Mated conditions within 365 days ofapproval by City Council If all conditions noted
ogre are not accomplished and the final plat is not approved within one year of the City
Council vote to close the roads this approval will be considered null and void
SECTION III
1 if the preceding conditions are not fulfilled on or before January 27 2.P004
this Ordinance will be deemed null and void without fl, ' her action by the City Council
2 If all conditions are met on or before January 27, 2004, the date of fal closure is the
date the street closure ordinance is recorded by the City Attorney
L]
SECTION IV
ON
certified copy of this Ordinance shall be filed in the Clerk's ' Office of
the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and indexed in the name ofthe CITY
F VIRGfNLA BEACH as "Grantor "
day of
A 8452
Jaenuary 7 2003
ca8452 ORD FM
Adopted b the Council of the City of Virginia Beach Virginia on this
.2003
APPROVE AS TO CONTENT
�z e� /-
I/3 /3
Planning Department
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FFi IENCY
iry A rnev
4
ORDINANCE NO
IN THE MATTER OF CLOSING, VACATING AND
DISCONTINUING A PORTION OF THAT CERTAIN
STREET INN AS PINE STREET AS SHOWN OIL
THAT CERTAIN PLAT ENTITLED "PLAT SHOWING
PROPOSED CLOSURE OF A PORTION OF PINE
STREET RIGHT OF WAY "PLAT OF R EM T„ (MB
, PG 51 DCT BER 2 2002, VIRGfNIA BEACH
IR INW
WHEREAS, on January 28, 2003 Kenneth A Hall Family Limited Partnership
applied to the Council of the City of Virginia Beach Virginia, to have the hereinafter described
street discontinued, closed, and vacated, and
WHEREAS, it is the 3udgment of the Council that s d street be discontinued,
closed, and vacated, subject to certain conditions having been met on or before January 27, 2004,
NOW, THEREFORE
SECTION I
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, that
the hereinafter described street be discontinued, closed and vacated, subject to certain conditions
being met on or before January 27, 2004
All that certain piece or parcel of land situate, lying and being in
the City of Virginia Beach Virginia, designated and described as
"PORTION OF PINE STREET TO BE CLOSED AREA = 87487
SF OR 0 195 C" shown as the cross -hatched area on that certain
plat entitled `PLAT SBO)VNG PROPOSED CLOSURE OF A
PORTION OF PINE STREET RIGHT OF WAY "PLAT of
ROSEMONT" MB 2, PG 51) OCTOBER 2., 2002 VIR rNIA
BEACH, VIRI x IA, Scale 1 "=50', prepared by MSA P C ,
copy of which is attached Hereto as Exhibit A
rPIN 1487-4 - 1487-53-0584 1487-53- 47
SECTION 11
The following conditions must be met on or before January 27 21004
1 The City Attomey's Office will male the final determination regarding
ownership of the underlying fee The purchase price to he paid to the City shall he determined
according to the "Policy Regarding Purchase of City's Interest in Streets Pursuant to Street
Closures," approved by City Council Copies of said policy are available in the Planning
Department
The applicant shall resuhdivrde the property and vacate internal lot lines to
incorporate the closed area into the adjoirung parcels The resin division plat shall be submitted
and approved for recordation prior to final street closure approval
The applicant is required to provide public utility easements over existing
water and sewer facilities to the satisfaction of Pudic Utilities These easements must he shown
on the sheet closure plat
4 The City reserves for fifteen (15) years from the date of recordation of the
closure, the right to repurchase the area of closure at the same prig paid l v the applicant to the
City plus a factor of % a year without compensation for any improvements or for damage to
the residue of the applicants' property This repurchase right shall be included in the deed or in
separate agreement to he recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of
Virginia Beach The deed or agreement shall be acceptable to the City Attorney
The applicant shall verify that no private utilities exist within the right-of-way
proposed for closure Preliminary comments nts from the utility companies indicate that there are
no pnvate utilities within the right-of-way proposed for closure If private utilities do exist, the
applicant shall provide easements satisfactory to the utility companies
Closure of th , right-of-way shall be contingent upon compliance with the
above stated conditions within 365 days of approval by City Council If all conditions noted
above are not accomplished and the final plat is not approved within one year of the City
Council vote to close the roadway, this approval will be considered null and void
SECTION III
1 If the preceding conditions are not fulfilled on or before January 27, 2004
this Ordinance will be deemed null and void without further action by the City Council
If all conditions are met on or before January 27, 2004, the date of final
closure is the date the street closure ordinance is recorded by the City Attorney
SECTION IV
3 A certified copy of this Ordinance shall he filed in the Clerk's Office of
the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and indexed in the name of the CITY
F VIRGI IIA BEACH a "Grantor "
day of
CA 8443
Januan 7 2003
ca8443 OED FR
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on this
2003
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT
1z1<2- Vd 1-13%8
Planning D artment
APPROVED AS TO LE AI FI E C
C i t Atto e
C
KENNETH A. HALL / # 14 & # 15
December 119 2002
General Information:
REQUEST Street Closure
ADDRESS (14) Portion of Pine Street beginning at the northern boundary of
I-264 and running northerly a distance of 140 83 feet more or less
(15) Portion of Second Street beginning between Poplar Street
and Pine Street and between Lots 8 & 16, Block 4 and Lots 1
remains of Lot 11, Block 10, Ja k cndale
Map Kenneth A. Mop NDc to Scale
y a
--- 0,
BONNEY
1 .71, A
n n '0
9
-022
002 G 7
DDi
2t�
I
r
ELECTION
DISTRICT 3 ROSE HALL
Planning Commission Agenda�}
December 11, 2002
FENNETH A HALL 14 & # 1
Page 1
SITE SIZE Pine Street —8,487 Square Feet
Second Street — 13,927 Square Feet
PURPOSE To close the subject portions of Pine and Second Streets to
resuhdivide and consolidate numerous small parcels into a tract or
tracts which are more advantageous for economic development
STAFF
PLANNER Barbara Duce
Land Use, Zoning,
and Site
Characteristics:
Existing Land Use and Zoning
The streets petitioned for closure
are unimproved paper streets All
of the property surrounding these
streets is either owned or under
contract by the applicant The
property surrounding the streets is
zoned B-2 Community Business
District
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning
The property situated immediately north of Second Street and east of Pine Street is
developed with an arbor service and a nonconforming single family home One of the
buildings used for the arbor business appears to be encroaching into the portion of
Second Street proposed for closure The area west of Pine Street is undeveloped at
this time, but is proposed as a parking and storage area for a new auto body shop
recently approved by City Council Interstate 264 borders the site to the south All of the
surrounding properties are zoned B-2 Community Business District
North Arbor Business zoned -2 Community
Business District
South Interstate 26
East Across Poplar Street, Auto repair zoned B-2
Community Business District
West Unimproved property zoned B-2 Community
munity
Planning Commission Agenda
December 119 2002
KENNETH A HALL # 14 & # 16
Page
Business District
Zoning Histo
In June 2001, City Council approved a street closure similar to this request located west
of the subject site The streets approved for closure were portions of Spruce Street and
Second Street, west of Pine Street In addition to the street closure, a conditional use
permit was approved for are auto body shop on the property encompassing these
streets The parking and storage area for the body shop will be built on the
undeveloped property west of Pine Street, the auto body shop building will be located
further west on the property
Public Facilities and Services
Water and Sewer
Water There are public water facilities in both the portion of Pine Street
and the portion of Second Street proposed for closure
Sewer There are public sewer facilities in both the portion of Pine Street
and the portion of Second Street proposed for closure
Public Works
Initial review indicates that there are no public drainage facilities with the rights -of -way
proposed for closure
Transportation
VDOT is in the process of conductrng a comprehensive corridor study of I-264, which
will involve improvements to the Rosemont Road/1-264 interchange Public Works is
evaluating the relocation of Bonney Road as part of this study
Public Safety
Police No Comment
Fire and No Comment
Fescue
Planning Commission Agenda
December 11, 2002
IEIETH A HALL 14 & # 1
Page
Private Utilities
Preliminary comments for the private utility companies indicate that there are no private
utilities in the portions of Pine Street and Second Street proposed for closure
Comprehensive Plan
The Comprehensive Plan Map recommends the area for development of retail, office,
service and other compatible uses within commercial centers In the southern portion of
the Kittle Neck k Area: development and redevelopment of commercial iarl areas in the
vicinity of the intersections of Virginia Beach Boulevard, Rosemont Road and Bonney
Road should seek to consolidate parcels to achieve a more coordinated development
plan, reduce the number of roadway access points, develop at medium to low intensities
and ensure high quairty building and site designs
Evaluation of Request
The viewers have determined that the proposed street closures will result in a public
inconvenience and, therefore, should not be granted Improvements to the Rosemont
Road li264 Interchange are currently being studied by VD T The proposed street
closures are directly in conflict with all four alternatives that v oT has developed for the
proposed interchange improvements In addition, the street closures are in conflict with
n ongoing Public Works study to relocate Bonney Road at this interchange The area
bung studied for the relocation of Bonney Food is between Spruce Street and
Rosemont Road The proposed street closures are in the middle of this study area
In June of 2001, the City Council approved a street closure for a portion of Second
Street west of the subject site and a portion of Spruce Street west of the subject site for
the same applicant, Kenneth A Mali A condition of that street closure was that an
agreement would be recorded reserving the City's right to repurchase the rights -of -way
within ten years The viewers are concerned that granting additional street closures
east of the recently approved street closure of Spruce Street and Second Street gold
significantly reduce the options to evaluate the relocation of Bonney Road as part of the
interchange study
The applicant has stated that positive economic development is the goal of this street
closure In the Little Neck area, consolidation of properties is encouraged by the
Planning Commission Agenda
December 11, 2002
KENNETH A HALL 1 # 14 & # 15
Page 4
Comprehensive Plan policies However, the Comprehensive Plan also recommends
that development proposals on rand located within the vicinity of the I-2 4 interchanges
concentrate on economically productive uses that are high quality The applicant has
not provided any details on the development plans for the consolidated properties Any
development plan of high quality should be well coordinated with the future
transportation needs at this interchange
The viewers contend that this request for street closures represents a piecemeal
approach to development that is not well coordinated with the future transportation
needs The street closures requested will result in public burden and inconvenience
because they conflict with all four alternatives currently developed and also conflict with
the ongoing Public Works study to relocate Bonney Fad at the time VDT interchange
improvements are made The viewers' recommendation is to deny this request for
street closures of portions of Pine Street and Second street
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 b
determined according to the "Policy Regarding Purchase of Cit 's Interest in
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 adorning parcels The plat must be
submitted and approved for recordation prior to final street closure approval
The applicant is required to provide public utility easements over existing grater
and sever facilities to the satisfaction of Public Utilities These easements must
be shown on the street closure plat
4 The City reserves, for ten 10 years from the date of recordat1on of the closure,
the right to repurchase the area of closure at the same price paid by the applicant
to the City plus a factor of % a year, without compensation for any
improvements or for damage to the residue of the applicants! property This
repurchase right shall be included in the deed or in a separate agreement to be
recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach
The deed or agreement shall be acceptable to the City Attorney
Planning Commission Agenda
December 11, 2002
KE NETH A HALL # 14 & # 1
Page
The applicant is required to verify that no private utilities exist within the right-of-
way proposed for closure Preliminary rents from the ubitty 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,
rust be provided
Closure of the right -of -war shell 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 -war this approval shall be
considered null and void
NOTE Further conditions maybe required during the
administration of PpOicable City Ordinances
Planning Commission Agenda
December 11 Y 2002
KEN ETH A HALL 14 & # 1
Page
i
f
CC
Iz zo
00
L �
M
p
A Ctlir50j,
(j)
5L 0 CKtt-V Z Z A Wei
Y-3 55 O )
VIPCIIVJA W CORD►; C !
.� .
.5
1 j
S8131 a 'O
N 86.V1 02 E z SLrCOND SNAFFir (50'R1*"W)
51)
E-L M V HOLLA4eA
,o j � ti -� 1
*Ln
�'—
7261670 75,yo
AW Z L A OW v
,. f A r
° -�
-7J Z
Vrc ;-487— 5J— 25 -5
�6007632 � L. HOB &-.A MA Y
fzj1GH TION 50 8 VA 2 5,48) 1
(00 1487-3,7-0479
"16HATCHED AREA DENOTES
PORTION F PINE
TO E CLOSED
f AREA = 5 487 F
A
Planning COmm's8lon Agenda
December 11, 2002
KENNETHA � -�
HALL # 1
Page
POPLAR smcEr (66" Rl000v
(U8 2 P' ,1
S O 'D"
E
OCK
ti
x
PINE
GI IA STATE PLANE RDA
SYSTEM SOT I�T�
ONE SAD 1
---- O
.ate (SOUTH)
00
Ln
71
L61 10
� 1 fir'
00
LA
tp
/5002
02 28 O 34" -Z 7-f
1
MEET (66'0 Rl,'W)
(ALB 2 P6 ,1
6WC COWN
Flanging Commission Agenda c a
ern er 11 , 22 ' k
KENNETH A HALL I # 14 & # 1
Pave
APPLICAT[0'N rya c.F .4 Of
STREET CLOSURE
CITY OF bIRGINIA BEACH
DISCLOSE STATEMENT
%pphunt s Name Kenneth la F al} Li-i ted Partriersh in - -
Lva All Current
Property 0 wners Rennoth A flail Fan, 1 v L.LM ed " C-crsh x p
If fha property owner is a CORPORATIO IN I is I a I I officer% of the CaToration below (Airach hs if a c c ess-rn �
- -- I
If the property owner is a PARTNERSHIP HIP "I or other UNMORPO AT D ORGANIZATION list k
all members or parmers ut the organimon blow (Atrach list if necessary)
Konen# h tl Ull
I
a C3 Cheep hem if the property owncr is NOT a corporanon partnership firm or other unincorporated
t organ:zaUon
If the applicant a nor the current owner of the properly complete the Applic ant Drsdo5rrre sect 10u below
A PPLI ANT DISCLOSURL
p If Lhe applicant is a CORPORATION list all officers of the Corporation below (Arracri lisr if necessar t )
If the applecant rs a FARTIVERS111P FIRM or outer U NINCORPORATED RGA N 17ATI 0 N list all �
mrmbcrs or partners in the organ az atron below (Arrach list if necesvary)
Chu here if the applicant is N OT a coq=attort partnership firm of other u n i ncorpora rcd or ,JnL7atrorn
f
CERnFICATION I cerh fit rhat the information contained herein is trite and accurale
kenneth A Hall Family Limited artnership
Sign rL
P Ed arch Rourdn ,.or , Attorne for l nt
Print Narre
Lh is
Planning Commission Agenda �
December 117 2002 �~
I ENNETH A HALL 14 & # 1
Page
Kenneth A Hall Fanuly Limited Partnership
Application of Kenneth A Hall Family Lirruted Partnership for the
discontinuance closure and abandonment of a portion ofPine Street
Application of Kenneth Hall Frml r Linut d l ar•tn r lup for the
discontinuance, closure and abandonment of a portion of Second Street
between Poplar Street and Pine Street and between Lots 8 and 16,
Block 4 and Lots l and remains of Lots 11 Block 10, Jacksondale
Distinct
Rose Hall
December 11 200
REGULAR AGENDA
Robert hiller The next item is Item #14 &. 15, Kenneth A Hall Fanuly Limited
Partnership
Eddie Bourdon Good afternoon Mr Chairman For the record, my name is Eddie
Bourdon, mercenary now representing Kenneth A Hall on both of these appllcantions
for street closures The two paper streets in question are located in the area that was
platted hack in the early 1900s known as Jacksondale This plat of this area was platted
in a grid pattern with a serves o -foot wide lots And unlike Shadowla n the
development pattem here is quite different and now we're in a position where under the
Comprehensive Plan and it's pretty obvious that this 1s an area that is right for
redevelopment and that is what the City s fortunate enough to have someone of Mr
Hll's vision desire to come in and acquire and he has been over the last number of years
acquiring many of these properties in this area and re -subdividing, vacating all these
lures elinunating all these little lots and creating larger parcels using his private capital a
opposed to a redevelopment housing authority or some other entity using public funds
He's doing the lob that needs to be dome in this area by assembling land and re -
subdividing, getting rid ofa lot of small properties, cleaning up a lot of blighted
properties And he has already invested approximately 15 rxm.rllron dollars in this area
accumulating properties and in building on to his existing facility and adding new
facilities Sarre thing is occurring here He has bought or is under contract to purchase
all of the land shown This is where the new credit union has been built by the school
system credit union and this property mere and the property Mere what you see over here
is all now one parcel It's been re -subdivided These lines all vacated These streets
aren't there 'These streets were closed as Barbara appropriately pointed out this monng
and this is now all one parcel where the new body shop is going to be constricted The
request here is to close these two paper streets that aren t utilized and to again, re -
subdivide those into one parcel This piece here, fir Hall has under a long term lease
with an option, not this corner, everything but that corner with an option to purchase but
it s not his option In other words, he cannot do 1t until the owner desires selling and
there's actually a timeframe they have to but it will be a few more years So that is why
we re leaving that street open because we don t own that piece of property here So we
will be closing this and assembling again, a lamer piece for development The likelihood
Item # 14 & 1
Kenneth A Hall Family Limited Partnership
Page 2
is that he is going to develop it himself for his own use and most likely as a service
facility for all the dealerships That would require a Conditional Use Permit and frankly
any use he would put to the property will require a Conditional Use Permit as you well
know auto sales Anything dealing with auto use storage, sales, parking etc is going to
require a Conditional Use so it will wine to this body when those plans are finalized
But the opportunity to buy these properties existed and he wanted to do ghat I think is
clearly right thing for thas area The conditions are all acceptable The idea that this
should stay the way it is until and you all know as you've seen it until such time as it's
determined ghat is going to happen with the interchange which could a quarter of a
century before we get to that point The war things are going economically, financially
and with our anti tax event these days I don't know when that's going to happen but we
are certainly willing as we were with the ether closure that Council approved for those
other streets to agree to sell the property back to the City for what we paid for it plus an
inflation factor of three percent a year Again, this puts the property on the tax rolls
Immediately pays the City for the property now and preserves the right for the City to
come back and take it later if it's needed without compensating us for any improvements
e make to the property we are willing to take that gamble because we don't think
that's going to happen Quite frankly, we think the application is one that should be
supported and we would request your support for the request with the conditions which
we think more than adequately protects what public interests exists in those paper streets
Ronald Ripley okay we have a question from Dot Wood
Dorothy wood Eddie, I d like to see this go to Mr Hall but I wonder about number
four Could we possible change the 1 o to 1 gears because of the problems now Frith
DOT, I think it would be certainly be 15 years before
Eddie Bourdon Dot let me suggest that we do this I will not object to that I don't
have "authority' but I certainly won't. object to your putting that stipulation in there if
between now and City Council Mr Hall advises me that he is not willing to do that then
lust want to reserve the opportunity to bring that to Council's attention if he has an
objection because Fm not in a position to ask him but I'm not going to object to it
Dorothy wood Thank you
Ronald Ripley Gene Crabtree has a question
Eugene Crabtree Eddie, am I under the understanding that Mr Fall has an option to buy
all of Mr Holloway's s property'?
Eddie Bourdon That is nay understanding Either he has an option or he has actually
purchased it I rn not sure which It s under contract or it may have already closed I
don't want to tell you
Eugene Crabtree So Mr Holloway and his business is gone
Item #14 & 1
Kenneth A lull Family Limited Partnership
Page 3
Eddie Bourdon All will g away And some f that i actually in the paper street
Ronald Ripley Charlie Salle'?
Charlie Salle' I have a question It sounds like there are going to be plans to build on
these areas with taking the risk that the City will never buy it back
Eddie Bourdon That will have to wine through the process of a Use Permit That i
what Mr Hall is moving towards He hasn't made a final determination to my
understanding but that will have to cone through a Conditional Use Pern-ut process, but
that is correct We looked at all the vanous options for the nght- =way that are at least
under consideration now and other than right along this section here, they don't affect the
rest of the property But there is a possibility that there may need to be an additional I
believe of possibly 50 feet of area along what is currently the merging In lane here ofI-
4 that aught even be widened But there wouldn't be a use of this street under any of
the scenarios that are out there and there are a number of then But on the other piece
where the body shop is being built one ofthe options is to have Bonney Road curve into
a flyover over I-4 In that whole process we set up contractual the opportunity for that
to tape place we reserve the opportunity for the City to do that if that were to come to
pass Because we left an area inhere the road could go through But that does not involve
this property Again, none of the options that I've seen and I've seen a number of them
that involve these type of east west here, it s ,lust simply a potential widening of the right-
of-way for I -
Charlie Salle well, I think City Council has sort ofset a precedent as far as how we
deal with this application but I can see 1t now that Mr Hall is going to m back with
Use Perx t to develop on these properties and the City is going to recommend denial
because 1t has the option to buy it back we'll be going around in circles here
Eddie Bourdon we were able to work it out on the property with the City and we don't
have any hesitation being that will be the feeling that will be done here as well and main,
the bottom line is that under any seenano if you put all these little lots together, you have
improved the situation from what exists today sr nlf cantly
JD
Charlie Salle' If we move this ball to a different court because I can see it corrung hack
with a Use Peanut application to build on some portion of these properties these streets
and the City is going to recommend denial of that perrrut because of the option to buy it
back and so it will be back to make an issue again
Eddie Bourdon Again when you look at what we know to be the likely requirement for
additional nght- f-way acquisition and you look at a setback situation from that, you
actually have very little of ghat s involved here would be potentially built upon But
that's for another day
Item #14 & 1
Kenneth A Hall Family Limited Partnership
Page
Ronald Ripley Any other questions9 John, you got a question's
John Baum It stills hang up a matter that I've been concerned for years when I used t
appraise real estate for going across all these highway projects and in a sense they re not
right for projects to be on the hoards for gears and years It just ruins people plans
There ought to be a time limitation either you put some money in to starting the project
in a sense At least get the paperwork done for something But to say you re going to do
something and nothing happens A lot of people really lost their property, adjoining
people and people renting their space See the survey stake somebody's going to do
something right away They don't do anything for gears It s not an anrucable procedure
but I'm agreeing with Charlie, precedent has already been set as far as I m concerned
Council s shown where they stand I might as well let it go
Eddie Bourdon Again I emphasize to you that you have a well respected business
leader who is again, I believe ve clearly is trying to do somedung that we should be
encouraging Understand there is some complicating factors but if we're going to as a
City, if we're going to move forward with redevelopment and have redevelopment take
place that's privately funded with private capital as opposed to other options that are out
there, there's got to be a willingness to work with the people with the private capital who
are willing to work with the City and willing to be equitable in the way they pursue these
ngs And, I think Ken has clearly demonstrated that in what he's done next door and
what's he doing throughout the City, in terms of upgrading his facilities and investing
rmllions of dollars in his facilities Thank you
Ronald Ripley Any opposition`
Robert Miller No
Ronald Ripley I lscussioO
Eugene Crabtree I'd make a motion that we accept this proposal as wntten with current
conditions
Kay Wilson Six conditions
Dorothy wood what about number four when I put in the 15 years verus the 10 gears
Eugene Crabtree Yes
Ronald Ripley So your motion is to approve
Eugene Crabtree To approve it with modifying condition 4 to say 15 years vice 10
Ronald Ripley Do I have a second`?
Charlie Salle" Second
Item #14 & 15
Kenneth A Mall Family Lirmted Partnership
Page
Donald Ripley Second by Charlie Salle A motion made by Gene Crabtree Any
discussion` Bob`
Robert Miller I need to abstain My firm 1s working with the Hail family on this area
Mr Scott, did you want to address this`
Robert Scott This is a real difficult issue And I think one of the last things we want to
do rs say let's lust paralyze this area" from now until we don't know when just in case
the road needs to be built I don't think that is what we're trying to say I think that if
someone were interested in building on their property that would be one thing Thus is a
proposal to build on our property, which is a different thing we are absolutely going to
need this for the public need There 1s a public need for this property Now, I m very
encouraged because I didn't understand this to be true but, I'm very encouraged by
contion #4 which holds out some hope that something can be pulled together here but,
1t is an absolute prerequisite in my nund that this has got to cost the City zero we can t
be giving up property only to buy 1t back later or to deal with improvements on it later
that causes an expense to be incurred by the public It's not anybody else's It s the
public's property that they want to build on And so there has to be a safe guard that 1n
the end result means that the cost to the public 1s zero And it's definutely condition #4 I
tbunk is a good step in that direction I do think it needs to be longer than 10 years And,
I thank we may have to work on the condition more I think that we need to come to gaps
with reality that it's going to be some period of time before the road improvements in this
area take place How long9 I don t know But it s going to be a lengthy period of time
But, the true economic development potential and the word 'redevelopment was used
earlier, the true potential is totally dependent on the ability to build that road and project
It's not to occur with Bonney Road and all the other roads out there the way they're now
The circulation pattern Ys lust not good enough So the critical point here is that some
how the public whose property is being requested here needs to be held harmless against
this action The end result it s got to be of no cost to the public And I think that if we
could work on condition ##4 a little bit, I do think that holds out a lot of hope Maybe,
that's the answer to the whole thing
Ronald Ripley Do you want to defer that to work on it more`
Robert Scott well, no, I know there's a need It's up to the Planning Conumssion but
maybe we can work on it before it goes to the Council I don t knout The other thing i
that the best way to do this would be to look at what Mr Bourdon refers to a Use Permit
that some day will be applied for The best way to do thus is to loop at it in conjunction
with that Use Pernut we don't know what they want to do here That's one of the
things that bothers us a little bit or even for that matter, how much of this property
actually would we need we dory t know that either we may be complicating this
picture tremendously for no benefit It would be better if we knew but that Use Peanut 1s
not before us one of the things that we thought as viewers was 1t would be good to have
that Use Permit so we know actually how much this property is needed by the pate
sector we don t know that but there is some hope and I think we need to be realistic
Item #14 & 1
Kenneth A Hall Farnuly Minuted Partnership
Page
about the future But we need to understand that it's the public s property that's here in
question and the public needs to protect
Ronald Ripley Thank you very much Anybody else have a comments Question? We
have a motion on the floor to approve at and seconded it and call for the vote
AYE 9 NAY 0 ABS I ABSENT1
ATKINSON
AYE
BAUM
AYE
CRABTREE
AYE
DIN
AYE
HORSLEY
AYE
HULLER
A S
RIPLEY
AYE
SALLE"
AYE
STRANGE
AYE
YARDS
ABSENT
WOOD
AYE
Ronald Ripley By a vote of 9-0 one abstention, the motion passes
R Gordon
t e '
r
Map to Bernice T Williams
�y.
0 IMP
Lo
up
r +
#
t
# i• I
qr
1
Sneer Closure
ZONING HISTORY
The following street closures are not shown on the map above, but were in
the vicinity of the subject application
Street Closure (western portion of alley between 52nd and "� Streets, east of
Holly Road) Approved 7-1 -01
Street Closure (alley between 4e Street and Bay Colony Drive and between
Myrtle Avenue and Atlantic Avenue) Approved 2-1 - 3
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM H Gordon & Elizabeth K Huey and Bernice T Williams — street closure
MEETING DATE January 28, 2003
■ Background
Application of H Gordon & Elizabeth K Huey and Bernice T Williams for the
discontinuance, closure and abandonment ment of a 15 foot alley beginning on the
west side of Ocean Avenue and running a distance of 270 feet to the east side of
Atlantic Avenue The proposed closure abuts the rear property lines of Lots E
H on 48th Street and Lots 180 — 184 on 491h Street Said parcel contains 4,050
square feet
The purpose of this request is to close the unimproved alley between and
th Streets The right-of-way will be incorporated into adjacent parcels and used
for additional yard area for each parcel
■ considerations
Two alley closures have occurred in the north end In 2001, the western end of
the alley just east of Holly Road between 52 "d and 53rdStreets was approved for
closure In 1983, the alley between 46th Street and Bay Colony Drive and
between Myrtle Avenue and Atlantic Avenue was approved for closure
The Viewers have concluded that this street closure will not result in a public
inconvenience and is acceptable Other than maintenance of existing public and
pn ate utilities, there is no identified public need for the portion of right-of-way
proposed for closure Easements placed over the alley can accommodate utility
maintenance needs
The Planning Commission placed this item on the consent agenda because there
would be no public inconvenience created by this closure Staff recommended
approval and there was no opposition to the proposal
■ Recommendations
The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded Grote of 1 -o to
approve this request with the following conditions
Huey and Williams
Page 2 of 2
The City ttorney's Office shall 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
2 The applicants and other affected property owners shall resubdivide their
properties and vacate internal lot lines to incorporate the closed alley area
into the adjoining parcels The plats shall be submitted and approved for
recordation prior to final street closure approval All plats shall be submitted
together
3 Preliminary comments from the virgins !Natural Gas and Dominion Virginia
Power indicate that there are private utilities within the right-of-way proposed
for closure The applicant is required to verify that no other private utilities
exist within the right-of-way proposed for closure Easements satisfactory t
the utility companies shall be provided
4 A utility easement is required to be dedicated as specified by Public Utilities
and Public Works No structures shall be permitted within the easement, but
fences may be permitted with an approved encroachment agreement The
easement shall be shown on the final plat
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
recorded within one year of the City Council vote to close the right-of-way this
approval shall be considered null and void
■ Attachments
Ordinance
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 r
)L %7 V)t
1 : L -01
IN THE TATTER OF CLOSING VACATING AND
DISCONTINUING A PORTION OF THAT CERTAIN
STREET KNOWN AS A 15 FOOT ALLEY BETWEEN48'-`
AND 49TH STREETS AND ATLANTIC AVENUE AND
OCEANFRONT AVENUE AS SHOWN ON THAT
CERTAIN PLAT ENTITLED PLAT SHOWING
CLOSURE OF 1 ' LANE ADJOINING LOTS 18 THRU
THE E 20' F LOT 185 PLAT OF THE H LLIES, M B 67
P 107 AND LOTS E THRU H RESUBDIVISION OF DOTS
153 THRU 158 PLAT OF THE H LLIES M B 4, P 1
VIRGINIA BEACH, V IRGII IA13
WHEREAS, on January 28, 2003, H Gordon Huey, Elizabeth K Huey and Bernice
T Williams applied to the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia., to have the hereinafter
described street discontinued, closed, and vacated, and
WHEREAS, it is thejudgment of the Council that said street be discontinued closed,
and vacated, subject to certain conditions having been met on or before January .21 7 2004,
NOW. THEREFORE,
SECTION I
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Virginua Beach, Virgima that the
hereinafter described street be discontinued closed and vacated, subject to certain conditions being
met on or before January 27, 2004
All that certain Piece or Parcel of land situate, lying and being in the
City of Virginia Beach, Viriiu, designated and described as 151
LANE TO BE CLOSED 1915 shown as the cross -hatched area on that
certain plat entitled `PLAT SHOWING CLOSURE OF 15' LADE
ADJOINING LOTS 180 THRU THE E o' F LOT 185 PLAT OF
PIN 1 -88- 4 , 41 - 8-8 97,241 - 8-9259 41 -9 - 4 418-88- 319, 2418-8 -85 0
241-88-9401, 418-88-94 and 2148-9 -04 4
THE HOLLIES., M B 61 P 107 AND LOTS E THRU H
RESUBDIVISION OF LOTS 153 THRU 158 PLAT OF THE
HOLLIES M B 497 P 11, VIRGINIA BEACH VIRGINIA ' dated
August , 2001 prepared by Gallup Surveyors and Engineers a copy
of &hich is attached hereto as Exhibit
SECTION II
The following conditions must be met on or before January 27, 2004
I The City A.ttornev's Office va 11 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'City's Interest in Streets Pursuant to Street Closures," approved her
City Council Copies of said policy are available in the Planmng Department
2 The applicant shall resubdivide the property and vacate internal lot lines to
incorporate the closed area into the adjoimng parcels The re ubdivision plat shall be submitted and
approved for recordation pnor to final street closure approval All plats shall be submitted together
Preliminary comments from the Virginia Natural Gas and Dominion Virginia
Power indicate that here are pnvate utilities witlun the right-of-way proposed for closure The
applicant is required to venfy that no other private utilities exist within the ngt-of=war proposed
for closure If private utilities do exist, the applicant shall provide easements satisfactory to the
utility companies
utility easement is required to be dedicated as specified by Public Utilities and
Publw works 'No structures shall be permuted vnthin the easement, but fences may be permitted
oath an approved encroachment agreement The easement shall be shown on the final plat
Closure of the nght-of- ay shall be contingent upon compliance with the above
Mated conditions within 365 days of approval by City Council If all conditions noted above are not
accomplished and the final plat is not approved within one year of the City Council vote to close the
roadway, this approval will be considered mull and void
2
SECTION III
1 If the preceding conditions are not fulfilled on o r before January 2 7, 2, this
Ordinance will be deemed null and void without further action her the City Council
If all conditions are met on or before January 27 2004 the date of final
closure is the date the street closure ordinance is recorded by the City Attorney
SECTION IV
certified copy of this Ordinance shall he filed in the Clerk's ' Office of the
Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach Virginia, and indexed in the name of the CITY OF
VI GI IA BEACH a "Grantor "
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virgirna Beach, Vir um, on this day
of 52003
A 8610
Date
\ oeuments and Sett ings\bduke LocaI S em n gs�Temp\C A 8 6 10 ORD F RM
APPROV AS TO CONTENT
Z; Q a 7jnN(0" /.- os
Planning D artment
APPROVED ED AS TO LEGAL. 1ENOr
itN Attorney
GORDON & ELIZABETH HUEY &
BERNICE T. WILLIAMS / # 11
December 11 9 2002
General Information;
APPLICATION
NUMBER L04 - 211 - STC - 2002
REQUEST UEST Street Closure
ADDRESS 15 foot alley between 48th and 49th Streets and Atlantic Avenue and
Oceanfront Avenue
Map
Gordon+ r
s ■ Scale Bernice
[11
low
per. - =- --
'
Street Closure
Planning Commission Agenda
December 11,2002
GORDONELI ABETH HUEY & BERNICE T WILLIAMS 11
Page 1
ELECTION
DISTRICT 6- BEACH
SITE SIZE 4,0 square feet
PURPOSE To close the unimproved alley between 48 h and 4 th Streets
STAFF
PLANNER Ashby Moss
Land Use, Zoning,
and Site
Characteristics:
Existina Land Use and Zonin
The alley requested for closure is
currently an undeveloped paper
street The lots on either side of
the alley are zoned R-7 5
Residential District
Surrounding Land Use and
Zoning
Forth Single -Family Homes R-7 5 Residential district
South Single -Family Homes R-7 5 Residential District
East oceanfront Avenue
West Atlantic Avenue
Zonina-History
Two alley closures have occurred in the north end In 2001, the western end of the
alley just east of Holly Road between 52nd and 3"a Streets was approved for closure
In 1983, the alley between 46 th Street and Bay Colony Drive and between Myrtle
Avenue and Atlantic Avenue was approved for closure
GORDON & ELI ABETH HUE
Planning Commission Agenda
December 11, 2002
& BERNICE T WILLIAMS ! # 11
Page 2
Public Facilities and Services
Water and Sewer
There is an eight -inch gravity sever within the alley proposed for closure
Public Works
There are no Public Works structures or pavement within the alley proposed for closure
utility easement will be acceptable provided no structures are permitted within the
easement
Public Safely
Police No Comments
Fire and No Comments
Fescue
Private Utilities
Virginia Natural Gas, Virginia Power, and the Hampton loads Sanitation District have
identified utilities within the alley Each utility company is amenable to closing the alley
as long as easements are provided
Comprehensive Plan
The Comprehensive Plan Map designates this area for low -density suburban residential
land use below 3 5 dwelling units per acre
Evaluation of Request
The Viewers have concluded that this street closure will net result in a public
inconvenience and is acceptable Other than maintenance of existing public and private
utilities, there is no identified public need for the portion of right -of -war proposed for
closure Easements placed over the alley can accommodate utility maintenance needs
The applicant has stated that the right-of-way will be incorporated into adjacent parcels
and used for additional yard area for each parcel Therefore, this street closure request
is recommended for approval subject to the conditions listed below
Planning commission Agenda
December 11, 22
GORDONELI ABETH HUEY & BERNICE T WILLIAMS 1 # 11
Page 3
0
Conditions
The City Attorney's Office shall make the final determination regarding ownership
f 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,'y approved by City Council Copies of the
policy are available in the Planning Department
2 The applicants and other affected property owners shall resubdfvide their
properties and vacate internal lot lines to incorporate the closed alley area into
the adjoining parcels The plats shall be submitted and approved for recordation
prior to final street closure approval All plats small be submitted together
Preliminary comments from the Virginia Natural Gast Dominion Virginia Power,
indicate that there are private utilities within the right -of -gray proposed for closure
The applicant is required to verify that no other private utilities exist within the
right-of-way proposed for closure Easements satisfactory to the utility companies
shall be provided
utility easement is required to be dedicated as specified by Public Utilities and
Public Works No structures shall be permitted within the easement, but fences
may be permitted with an approved encroachment chment agreement The easement
shall be shown on the final plat
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 recorded 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 maybe required during the
administration- of applicable City Ordinances
Planning Commission Agenda
December 11, 2002
GORDON & ELIZABETH HUEY & BERNICE T WILLIAMS / # 11
Page 4
Plans and Supporting Graphics
no aus
�
n
�
La 6-z
0
M U.
wLLJ
ED<�
,U3
ML ��4C
1
T-
3 Cr.
Ld
(Lyld — LS Is1)
(Mld3W--MNV300
a�C1
0
—
!J3
Ix
I
�
1l-1
ul
J
{1?
Yid s
LLj
r-
co
0
Cn
Fa
0 Cn
0
< tp
CL
O
7
COL
J
Lit
U
LJ f-
J
L i titl
C
'`" 1
1; t
3 T IIa7 —U
Planning Commission Agenda
December 11, 2002�
GORDON ELI ABETH H E M & BERNICE T WILLIAMS 11 ~�
Pepe
Aerial and Location Map
Planning Commission Agenda
December 11 2002
GORDON & ELIZABETH HUEY & BER LICE T WILLIAMS # 11
Page
Planning Commission Agenda
December 119 2002
GORDON ELI ABETH HUEY & BERNICE T WILLIAMS # 11
Page
Disclosure Statement
PAGE 4 OF 4
�y
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
q Gard G bJ. ev ElLzabeth K duet/ (Lots � and F)
;Omt s Nalme- Bernice i ihillispa {Lot W
LASt ICU Cirrmaj
gram same aft above
k
UMRn OWPM MSCLOnW
I[ th+c property owwr is a CORPDRAMON i 9 a] I offloem of the Corpamon below "A ere is dnecessarvir
If the propaq owner Ls a PARTNMEV FMK or othcr UTON CORPORATED OF G tNEZATION Jist
W1 membw or pumas is the o4zuzzwsi bekw (A rack rwressary)
ZA
Cbe& liae if cbc pr perry owe es NOT a empo ar = p=oer 4 Cum., or oLher unin rpomed
arum
If As app caw is nAg the c tsnl awndr gfdw party compkis dw Alp Uctwf Dwckaswc rtciron 646ow
If the appb:cwt is a C R MRAT [Oh lat &D offkcen of ft Corpomoo below 4A =ch lrst ,f r oersary )
h/A
r�
If tbe apphcAnt is at PAR FHi �, or other LTMCOR ` RA77D 0 RGAN t7,k AWN list all
membm or pamws zn the orgarawbon belov► i,4n h I= rf ne wi-y)
s/A
Choc c here Lf the zMbcant is NOT a cvrpomm parmtmtup Cum or ocher unincorporated arpn=uon
CER TM A314DN I cerafy that the S *rnuttWn cord heron zs &rue and accurate.
Z/ 00
tg�
Le�11� R i�a��rsn
t arnc
Planning Commission Agenda
December 11, 2002
GORDON & ELIZABETH HUEY & BERNtCE T WILLIAMS / # 11
Page 8
H Gordon & Elizabeth K Huey and Bemice T Williams
Discontinuance closure and abandonment
West side of Ocean Avenue and running a distance of 270
feet to the east side of Atlantic Avenue
District
Beach
December 12, 2002
CONSENT
Dorothy Wood The next item is Item 11, H Gordon & Elizabeth K Huey and Bernice
Williams, an application for discontinuance closure and abandonment of a 15 foot alley
running a distance of 270 feet to the east of Atlantic Avenue This is in the L rnnha en
District Thank you
Ronald Ripley Beach
Dorothy Wood Beach? Okay
Les Watson Yes ma'am My name is Les Watson I'm a local attorney representing
the applicants and we've read the conditions and they're fine with us
Dorothy wood we heard that there aught be some opposition is there opposition to
Item #I l
Ronald Ripley No one signed up
Dorothy Food Is there any opposition to thus item? Thank you Mr Watson
Les Watson Thank you
Ronald Ripley Let s do the motion first Get approval on the notion and then we're
back
Dorothy wood Mr Ripley I'd like to move and approve the following consent agenda
stern, Item #11 with five conditions
Ronald Ripley Okay
Donald Horsley I'll second the motion
Dorothy wood Betsy
Betsy Atkinson Thank you Item #11 is a street closure for Gordon Huey and Elizabeth
Huey and Bernice Williams to close a portion of a street between ' Street and `h
Street from Atlantic Avenue to the Oceanfront That would be a 1 -foot wide alley,
Item #11
H Gordon & Elizabeth K Huey and Bernice T Williams
Page
long and a little over 4 000 square feet of area All nine property owners on either side of
this alley have agreed to purchase their part to the nudway of the alley with the
recommendation that all the plats be recorded at the wine time and all the property
owners agree to get easements over the 1-1~t right-of-way for utilities And we did
learn this morning that Hampton Roads Severer does not have a utility in that area so that
is being struck from our conditions But with the viewers recommendations that the alley
be closed and positive staff recommendation the Con=ssion agree that this was a good
item to put on our Consent agenda
Ronald Ripley Okay with that said and with the motion on the table I would like to call
for the motion We re reader to Grote I believe
AYE 10 NAY
TKINS N
AYE
BAUM
AYE
CRABT EE
AYE
DIN
AYE
HORSLEY
AYE
MILLER
AYE
RIPLEY
AYE
SA.LLE'
AYE
STAGE
AYE
YAS
WOOD
AYE
ABSO ABSENT I
Ronald Ripley By a rate of 10-0 the motion passes
ABSENT
ZONING HISTORY
1 Conditional Use Pew it (Tattoo Studio Body Piercing Establishment) — Approved
2--2
Conditional Use Permit (Automobile Repair) — Approved5-22-89
Conditienal Use Permit (Pistol Range) — Approved4-24-89
Rezoning R-S Residence Suburban t 1-1 1 General Industrial) — Denied 7-1 -7
2 Conditional Use Permit (Communication Terrier) — Approved 12-12-95,1-23-96
Conditional Use Permit (Automobile Repair and Car Wash) h — Approved -1 -91
Street Closure — Approved 3-28-00
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM Blue horseshoe Tattoo Two, Ltd — Conditional Use Permit
MEETING DATE January 28, 2003
■ Background
An Ordinance upon Application of Blue Horseshoe Tattoo Two, Ltd for a
Conditional Use Permit for a tattoo and body piercing studio on the northwest
corner of London Bridge Road and Borland Parkway (GPIN 1496899764)
Parcel is located at 513 London Bridge Road and contains 1 22 acres
DISTRICT 6 — BEACH
The purpose of this request is to obtain a Conditional Use Permit to permanently
operate a tattoo studio !body piercing facility (a previous use permit limited the
use to one year)
■ Considerations
The site is at the intersection of London Bridge Road and Bowland Parkway The
building is one story block: 7,800 square feet in area Bay Screen and Graphics
and Blue Horseshoe Tattoo occupy the building To the north of the site exists an
accountant's office, to the west exists warehouses occupied by automobile repair
and other industrial type uses To the east of the site is London Bridge Road,
across London Bridge Road is property owned by the United States Davy The
area is a mixture of office, service, and industrial uses
The Health Department reports that there have been no violations of the
requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance, Section 22 1 The Police
Department and the Zoning Enforcement Section of the Current Planning
Division report that no complaints have been received regarding the operation
The Planning Commission placed this item on the consent agenda because the
applicant has been ,n operation for the past year with no complaints Staff
recommended approval and there was no opposition to the proposal
N Recommendations
The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 1 -o to
approve this request with the following conditions
Blue Horseshoe Tattoo Two
Page 2 of 2
1 The conditional use permit for a tattoo body piercing establishment i
approved for a period of one year, with an administrative review every
year thereafter
2 A business license shall not be issued to the applicant without the
approval of the Health Department for consistency with the provisions of
Chapter 23 of the City Cole
3 No signage more than four (4) square feet of the entire glass area of the
exterior wall(s) shall be permitted on the windows There shall be no other
signs, including neon signs or neon accents installed on any wall area of
the exterior of the building, windows and / or doors
The actual tattooing body piercing operation on a customer shall not be
risible from any public n ht-of-way adjacent to the establishment
The hours of operation shall be 10 00 a m to 10 00 p m , Monday through
Saturday, and 12 oo p rn to 8 00 p m on Sunday
0 Attachments
Staff R evi ew
Disclosure Statement
Planning Commission Minutes
Location Map
Recommended Action Staff recommends approval Planning Commission recommends
approval
Submitting Department/Agency Planning Department
City Manager Qic 5d0/11,
� BLUE HORSEHOE TATTOO TWO / # 7 1
December 11, 2002
General Information:
APPLICATION
NUMBER l 07-CUP -2002
REQUEST Conditional use permit for a tattoo studio body pierctng facility
ADDRESS The northwest corner of London Bridge Road and Bowland
Parkway, 513 London Bridge Road
mapNot Blue Iforseshoe I&Uoo�w
a � �
IL
r
oa
I
G Pi N 146764
ELECTION
DISTRICT 6 - BEACH
Gpin 1---4
JI 0 �j
oceama Naval
r
4
y4
y
1 y y
r
r
I�
1-
� I
Planning Commission Agenda
December 11, 2002
BLUE HORSEHOE TATTOO TWO 1
Page 1
SITE SIZE 1 272 acre, or 55,408 square feet
STAFF
PLANNER Faith Christie
PURPOSE To obtain a conditional use permit to permanently operate a
tattoo studio /body piercing facility (a previous use permit
limited the use to one year)
Mayor Issues:
Continued compliance with the requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance,
Section 22 1 and in Chapter 23 of the City Code pertaining to tattoo body
piercing establishments
• Continued compatibility of this use with the surrounding uses in the area
Land Use,
Zoning, and Site
Characteristics:
Existing. Land Use and
ZonrnQ
A one-story block building, a
one story metal building and
parking areas occupy the
site Currently Bay Screen
and Graphics and Blue
Horseshoe Tattoo occupy
the site The site is zoned B-
2 Community Business
Drstnct
Surrounding _Land Use and Zoning
North 0 Office uses 1-1 Light Industrial District
South 0 Bowland Parkway
Planing Commission Agenda
December 11, 2002
BLUE HORSEH4E TATTOO TWO / # 7
Page 2
Across Bowland Parkway are Office warehouse
uses B-2 Community Business and 1-1 Light
Industrial Districts
East London Bridge Toad
• Across London Bridge Road, United States Navy
y
property 1-2 Heavy Industrial District
West Office Warehouse uses I - 1 Light Industrial
District
Zoning HistM
In 1970, a request to rezone the site from R-S3 Residence a Suburban to M-1 1 General
Industrial District was denied From 1973 to the present the site has been zoned B-2
Community Business District In 1989 two conditional use permits, a pistol range and an
automobile repair establishment were approved on the site Several variances for
parking and landscaping were granted on the site in 1989 A conditional use permit for a
tattoo studio body piercing establishment was approved for the site in February 2002
Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ)
The site is in an AICUZ of greater than 75dB surrounding NAS Oceana The United
States Navy requests that the applicant continue to be made aware that high-
performance fighter aircraft routinely fly over this area at all hours of the day and night
This flight activity produces very high noise and vibration levels in this area that could
affect the applicant's operation
Natural Resource and Physical Characteristics
The site is impervious, covered by building and parking The site is in the Resource
Management Area of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area
Public Facilities and Services
Water and Sewer
Water There is a twelve- (112) inch water main in London Bndge Road
fronting the site There is an eight- (8) inch water main in Bowland
Parkway on the south side of the site The site has an existing 5/8-
inch meter that may be used
Planning Commission Agenda
December 11 , 2002
BLUE HoRSEHoE TATToo TWO
Page 3
Sewer There is an eight- (8) inch sanitary sewer main in London Bridge
Road fronting the site There is an eight- (8) inch sanitary sewer
main in Bowland Parkway on the south side of the site The site
has city sewer
There is an eight (8) inch water main and an eight (8) inch sanitary sewer main in a 30
foot wide ingress /egress easement, which also includes a 15 foot wide utility
easement, on the north side of the property
Transportation
Master Transportation Plan (MTP) /Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
London Bridge Road, in front of the site, is currently atwo-lane undivided minor
arterial (suburban) roadway The roadway is shown on the Master Transportation
Plan as a 100 foot wide divided roadway with a bikeway C!P Project #2-137-004
Great Neck Road /London Badge Road Phase III will improve this roadway to a four
lane divided highway with a bikeway This improvement will improve the current level
of service E to a level of service C-D
Traffic Calculations
Street Marne
Present
Volume a
Present
Capacity
Generated Traffic
1
1 = 1 0
ADT
Ei#rn Land Use � 32
London rid Read
DT '
Levu of
Proposed Lard Use 3 89
�
Service
e
CE
Average Daily Taps
2 as defined by retail use
3 as defined by Tattoo Studio/Body Piercing
Public Safety
Police The applicant is encouraged to continue to work with the Crime
Prevention Office within the Police Department for cnme
prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through
Environmental Design (OPTED) concepts and strategies as
they pertain to this site
Fire and No mment
Planning Commission Agenda
December 11, 2002
BLUE HORSEHOE TATTOO TWO / # 7
Page 4
Rescue
Comprehensive Plan
The Comprehensive Plan Map designates this area for a variety of employment uses
including business parks, offices, and appropriately located industrial and employment
support uses
Summary of Proposal
Bettina
The site is at the intersection of London Badge Road and Borland Parkway
The building is one story block, 7,800 square feet in area Bay screen and
Graphics and Blue Horseshoe Tattoo occupy the building To the north of the
site exists an accountant's office, to the vest exists warehouses occupied b
automobile repair and other indurstnal type uses To the east of the site is
London Bridge Road, across London Bridge Road is property owned by the
United States Navy The area is a mixture of office, service, and industrial
uses
Site Design
The submitted site plan shows two buildings on the site, a one-story masonry
building and a one story metal building The masonry building: the subject of
this application, is situated approximately 45 feet from London Bridge Road
and 34 feet from Bowland Parkway
Vehicular and Pedestrian Access
There are entrances to the site from both London Bridge Load and Bowland
Parkway Vehicular circulation on the site appears to be adequate
Twenty -on e 21 parking spaces are required for the tattoo studio body
piercing establishment and the existing screen -printing graphics operation
The applicant, as a condition of the conditional use permit approved in
Planning Commission Agenda
December 11 , 2
BLUE HoRSEHOE TATTOO TWO
Page
February 2002, re -striped the parking Rot to accommodate the required
parking for both uses
There are no sidewalks in this area
Architectural Design.
• There are two buildings on the site A one-story masonry buflding ,s situated
on the front of the site The front of the buiiding is half wall half window
design The sides and rear are masonry A one story metal building sits on
the rear of the site Both buildings are typical of retail industrial type
structures that were built in the 1960s and 1970s The applicant recently
painted the building white with blue tarn
Landscape and Open Space Design
The site was developed before any landscaping requirements were adopted
as part of City ordinances However as a condition of the conditional use
permit approved in February 2002 the applicant has provided shrubs around
the existing parking area, and foundation screening along the wall facing
owland Parkway Planter boxes have been placed along the front of the
building facing London Bridge Boulevard
Evaluation of Request
The request for a conditional use permit for a permanent tattoo studio Cody piercing
establishment is acceptable subject to the conditions below The Health Department
reports that there have been no violations of the requirements of the City Zoning
Ordinance: section 242 1 The Police Department and the Zoning Enforcement section
of the Current Planning Division report that no complaints have been received regarding
the operation
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit request to permanently
operate a tattoo studio body piercing establishment subject to the following conditions
Planning Commission Agenda
December 11, 2002
BLUE HORSEHOE TATTOO TWO
Page
Conditions
1 The conditional use permit for a tattoo body piercing establishment is approve
for a period of one year with an administrative review every year thereafter
2 A business license shall not be issued to the applicant without the approval of the
Health Department for consistency with the provisions of Chapter 23 of the City
Code
3 No signage more than four (4) square feet of the entire glass area of the exterior
wall(s) shall be permitted on the windows There shall be no other signs,
including neon signs or neon accents installed on any wall area of the exterior of
the building, windows and / or doors
The actual tattooing body piercing operation on a customer shall not be visible
from any public right-of-way adjacent to the establishment
The hours of operation shall be 10 00 a m to 10 oo p rx , Monday through
Saturday, and 12 00 p m to 8 00 p rn on Sunday
NOTE Further cond►trons maybe required during the
administration of applicable City Ordinances The site plan
submitted with this conditional use permit may require
revision during detailed site plan review to meet all
applicable City Codes Conditional use permits must be
activated within 12 months of City Council approval See
Section 220(g) of the City Zoning Ordinance for further
information
Planning Commission Agenda
December 11, 2002
BLUE H4RSEHOE TATTOO TWO / # 7
Page 7
IA
0
Are fAr
. r ' * s
rz*ALzT W..eow
4L
MMMA-
71
M rr In Bodo
„W
M
1h
Blue Horseshoe
(existing site layout)
Planning Commission Agenda
December 115 2002
BLUE H RSEH E TATTOO TWO # 7-
Page
Blue Horseshoe Tattoo Two, Ltd
Conditional Use learnt
Northwest corner of London Bridge Road and Rowland Parkway
513 London Bridge Road
District
Beach
December 1 oo
XIMMI a I
Dorothy wood The next item is Item #7 which is the Blue Horseshoe Tattoo To Ltd
It's an application for the Blue Horseshoe Tattoo Two Ltd for a Conditional Use Permit
for a tattoo and body-plercincr studio on London Bridge Road and Bowland Parkway It
is in the Beach Distnct and it has five conditions
Barry Koch Barry Koch, attorney for the applicant Blue Horseshoe Tattoo Two and
they accept all those conditions They are pleased to come back this year and say they ve
had no complaints whatsoever and appreciate your consideration
Dorothy Wood Thank you
John Baum Igo they pay you off in tattoos`?
Barry Koch I was worried that somebody rm ht ask that but 1f you ever want to get one
that's the cleanest and safest facility to go to
Dorothy wood Thank you Is there any opposition to Item #7 Blue Horseshoe Tattoo
Two Ltd'? Hearing nine Mr Ripley I'd like to move and approve the following
consent agenda items Mr Horsley would you please tell us about Item # 9
Donald Horsley Number seven, the Blue Horseshoe Tattoo Two, this was approved
about a year ago They have been in operation for a year They had no violations, no
complaints and with the conditions that we've got and the good record that they've had
for the year, we felt with favorable staff recommendations that it should be continued s
that's our reasons for these sterns being on the consent agenda
Donald Ripley Thank you very much
Ronald Ripley okay
Okay we have a motion by Dot wood and seconded by Don Horsley okay with that
said and with the motion on the table, i would like to call for the motion we're ready to
vote I believe
AYE 10 NAY 0 ABS 0 A SE T I
Item
Blue Horseshoe Tattoo Two Ltd
Page
ATKINSON
AYE
BUM
AYE
CR BT E
AYE
DIN
AYE
HORSLEY
AYE
MILLER
AYE
RIPLEY
AYE
SAL LE'
AYE
STRANGE
AYE
YAKOS
WOOD
AYE
Ronald Ripley By a vote of t o-o the motion passes
ABSENT
fa
T- (an
pIII i
a rC:D
JFANTE-
=14
10 j
'do
'
+ q�
K
ri
W L! E' t�
.
r jr
4 {
(',pin 1496a1�997
ZONING HISTORY
Entire Area - Change f Zoning (PD-H to PD-H1 Planned Un(t
DevelopmentDistrict)
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM Sandra Ballweg — Conditional Use Permit
MEETING DATE January 28, 2003
E Background
An Ordinance upon Application of Sandra Ballweg for a Conditional Use Permit
for a home occupation (day care) on the south side of DuBois Place, 72 42 feet
west of Jansen Way (GPIN 1496316991) Parcel is located at 2933 DuBois
Place and contains approximately 5,490 square feet DISTRICT 7 —PRINCESS
ANNE
The purpose of this request is to operate a home daycare facility to care for up to
12 children seven days a week
■ considerations
The applicant proposes to operate a home daycare for up to 12 children, Sunday
through Saturday The hours of operation will be flexible so as to accommodate
work schedules for military personnel and medical and shift work employees
Both the applicant and an assistant, as needed, will be in the home to care for
the children
The single-family dwelling is located on a 5,500 square foot lot There is an
above ground pool and a hot tub in the rear yard The applicant proposes to
install a fence that will enclose the children's play area to the southwest corner of
the property Access into the play area from the house will be via recently
installed sliding grass doors
The request for a home occupation (daycare) operating Sunday through
Saturday is acceptable by staff, subject to a reduction in the number of children
requested from twelve (12) to ten (10) The home day care use can potentially
generate an additional 25 daily vehicular taps Section 234 (b) of the City's
Zoning Ordinance states that "No traffic shall be generated by such activity in
greater volumes than would normally be expected in the neighborhood "The
reduction to ten (10) children will somewhat lessen the amount of traffic and is
more in keeping with residential uses and the intent of the ordinance The
applicant is in the process of applying for a license from the State Department of
Social Services, which is responsible for ensuring quality care for the children
Condition #6 below requires that the applicant receive the license from the State,
therefore, inspections and requirements of that agency must be met
Sandra Ballweg
Page 2 of 2
There was no opposition to the proposal
0 Recommendations
The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 10-0 to
approve this request with the following conditions
1 The home daycare shall be limited to a total of ten (10) children other than
children living in the home There shalt be no more than five (5) children
under the age of 2�h in the homy: at one time
2 No more than one person other than a relative residing in the home shall
be employed by the home daycare
3 A solid fence, minimum height of six (6), feet shall be installed to create an
enclosed play area as identified on the site plan prior to issuance of any
license Said fence shall be maintained at all times
Any loose materials or equipment in the yard shall be removed or stored in
an enclosed building
o signs advertising the home daycare shall be permitted on the lot or
buildings on the lot at any time
The applicant shall maintain a fatally daycare home license with the
Commonwealth of Virginia Failure to maintain a family daycare home
license shall terminate this conditional use permit
The applicant shall receive a certificate of occupancy from the Building
official for the home daycare residential use
■ Attachments
Staff Review
Disclosure Statement
Planning Commission Minute
Location Map
Recommended Action Staff recommends approval Planning Commission recommends
approval
Submitting Department/Agency Planning Departmen
City Manager IC , 3 W�'t
SANDRA BALLWE # 9
December 115 2002
General Information:
A PUC TION
NUMBER
REQUEST
ADDRESS
GI
ELECTION
DISTRICT
H09-21 -C P-2 02
Conditional Use Permit for home day care
2933 DuBois Place
Aag H-
1' za scale
�.
ktilok�
,'� � ter; ■
' i # 't+i M
14963169910000
# — PRINCESS ANNE
pin 1 96-31 1
Planning Commission Agenda �
December 11 # 2003
SANDRA EALLWEG
Page 1
SITE SIZE 5,490 square feet
STAFF
PLANNER Carolyn A K smith
PURPOSE To operate a home daycare facility to care for up to 12 children seven
days a week
Major Issues:
• Impact of additional noise and traffic on neighboring properties
Land Use, Zoning, and
Site Characteristics:
Existing Land Use and Zoning
A single-family home currently exists on
the property The property is zoned PD-
H1 Planned Unit Development District
Surroundina Land Use and Zomnq
North Dubois Place, single-family dwellings PD-H1
Planned Unit Development District
South Single-family dwellings PD-H 1 Planned Unit
Development District
East Single-family dwellings PD-H 1 Planned Unit
Development District
West single-family dwellings PD-H1 Planned Unit
Development District
Planning Commission Agenda
December 11, 2003
SAI Di A BALLWEG #
Page
Zoning Histo[y
The only activity in the vicinity of this site within the last 20 years was for a change in
zoning to create the Planned Unit Development where this site is located City Council
approved this request on January 111 1982
Air Installation Compatible Use Zone(AICUZ)
The site is in an AlCUZ of greater than 75dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana
Natural Resource and Physical Characteristics
There are no significant environmental resources on this site as it is currently developed
as asingle-family lot
Public Facilities and Services
Transportation
Traffic Calculations
Street Name
Present
Present
Generated Traffic
Volume
Capacity
No traffic information
Existing Land Use — 10 ADT
available for DuBois
N/A
N
Place
I
Proposed Land Use — 35 ADT
Average Daily Trips as defined by one 1 single family dwelling
Average Daily Trips as defined by twelve 1children In hone daycare plus single family dwelling
Public Safety
Police The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the
Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for cnme
prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Trough
Environmental Design (OPTED) concepts and strategies as
they pertain to this site
Fire and No more than five children under 2 ' years of age are
Rescue permitted unless the use is designated as an ;`I" use group
Planning Department Permits and Inspections Division shall
determine requirements, if any, for fire protection systems
Planning Commission Agenda
December II, 2003
SANDRA BALLWEG
Page
,.jvm
A.
TS
06
Comprehensive Plan
The Comprehensive Plan Map recommends suburban residential land use for the
subject property with a density at or below 3 5 dwelling units per acre One of the
Citywide Policies listed in the Comprehensive Plan is to 96preserve and protect the
character of existing stable neighborhoods against inappropriate lead use intrusions „
However, the Plan specifically recognizes the "legitimate public need for a limited
amount of compatible support activities, such as daycare services and housing for
people with special needs " p 1
Summary of Proposal
Proposal
The applicant proposes to operate a home daycare for up to 12 children,
Sunday through Saturday
• The hours of operation will be flexible so as to accommodate modate work schedules
for military personnel and medical and shift work employees
• Both the applicant and an assistant, as needed, will be in the home to care for
the children
Site Design
0 The single-family dwelling is located on a 5,500 square foot lot
There is an above ground pool and a hot tub in the rear }yard The applicant
proposes to install a fence that will enclose the hildren's play area to the
southwest corner of the property Access into the play area from the house
will be via recently installed sliding glass doors
Planning Commission Agenda
December 11, 2003
SANDRA BALLWEG
Page
J5
1
W
Vehicular and Pedestrian Access
* The applicant has a straight drive leading to a garage
• The existing driveway can accommodate up to four (4) parked cars
* Pedestrian access is adequate aria existing sidewalks
Architectural Design
The existing Douse is a two-story frame hue with vinyl siding Nochanges
to the a tenor of the mouse are proposed
Evaluation of Request
The request for a home occupation (daycare) operating Sunday through Saturday is
acceptable subject to a reduction in the number of children requested from twelve (12)
to ten (10) The home day care use can potentially generate an additional 25 daily
vehicular trips Section 234 (b) of the City's Zoning Ordinance states that "No traffic
shall be generated by such activity in greater volumes than would normally be expected
in the neighborhood "The reduction to ten (10) children will somewhat lessen the
amount of traffic and is more in keeping with residential uses and the intent of the
ordinance The applicant is in the process of applying for a license from the State
Department of Social Services, which is responsible for ensuring quality care for the
children Condition #6 below requires that the applicant receive the license from the
State, therefore, inspections and requirements of that agency must be met Staff
recommends approval of this application subject to the following conditions
Conditions
1 The home daycare shall be limited to a total of ten (10) children other than
children living in the home There shall be no more than five (5) children under
the age of 2�/2 in the home at one time
Planning Commission Agenda
December 119 2003
SA DRA BALLWEG
Page
UW
2 No more than one person other than a relative residing in the home shall be
employed by the home daycare
3 A solid fence, minimum height of six (6), feet steall be installed to create an
enclosed play area as identified on the site plan prior to issuance of any license
Said fence shall be maintained at all times
Any loose materials or equipment in the yard shall be removed or stored in an
enclosed building
No signs advertising the home daycare shall be permitted on the let or buildings
n the lot at any time
The applicant shall maintain a family daycare home license with the
Commonwealth of Virginia Failure to maintain a family daycare home license
shall terminate this conditional use permit
The applicant shall receive a Certificate of Occupancy frorn the Building Official
for the home daycare/residential use
NOTE Further conditions maybe required during the
administration of applicable City Ordinances The site plan
submitted with this conditional use permit may require
revision during detailed site plan review to meet all
applicable City Codes Conditional use permits must be
activated within 12 months of City Council approval See
Section 220(g) of the City Zoning Ordinance for further
information
Planning Commission Agenda
December 11, 2003
SANDRA BQLLWEG / # 9
Page 6
PLANS AND SUPPORTING GRAPHICS
LOT 43
73a� ifXX
LOT 46
LOT 45
DUBQIS PLACE (5Q' R/W )
2"0"
0'
� 05 IN
1pr
R
Planning Commission Agenda
December 119 200
SAI DRA BALLWE ~-
Page
Planning Commission Agenda •�
December 11 , 2003
SANDRA BALLWEG
Page
Disclosure Statement
APPLCCAT'SDN PAGE 4 OF .1
i:OMITHWAi USE PERMM
eTrY OF VrRcMA $sacH
DISCLOSURE STAT TENT
List Ali Cumenz
PROPERTY OwN7ER DtsmosuRjE
If the preper r owncr i% a LORPORAIlO Ilsi a)I offiom of IM CbrNrah on Mo%k (A arch i ,rr jj nrrrss )
r +
If &M property owner a, a ?ARThT SHW FI M or od= UNIN CORPOR-4 T19D OR GA CATION I j % i
aD Membery or pamers irn the orgmL=on beJow- (Anarh kn if mrcraa^)
,,' r--*
heic if lhl- *oper w Qwu= S NOT a m-a 4na par w mhtp xi-m of het a % .c atW eu d
orgzuutton
If the qwlicaw s na the cumn oWfir of the property carylrte the App Medw Duciasurr &sawn hrlaw
APPLICANT DUMOSURE
if ibe applicani u a CORMRAT10 ILst ell affie= of the Corpom m below (Altarh lesr rf rtecersary)
1
If ibt mMhcaw is a PARTMEPSH P F ir'! or otber UNINCORPORATED ORGANI ZATION I AI
members or parmcrs in the organ=uon below (Amzch I n rjr necrtsary)
C C here ]f the applicant is ] a corporaucn p=cnr 1p fimL, or od er tmincorpor-tred organ j=cm
WMC&TION I catib LW ihe infomarwn conzwned herein 4S rate 4nd QCcut e
��..�. --
igrutu m
Part slam
Planning Commission Agenda
December 11, 2003
SANDRA BALLWEG / # 9
Page 10
Sandra Ballweg
Conditional Use Permit
South side of DuBois Place
2933 DuBois Place
District
Princess Anne
December 1 2002
CONSENT
Dorothy Wood The next Item is Item #9, which is Sandra Ballweg an application for a
home occupation (day care) on DuBois Place in the Princess Anne Borough with seven
conditions Mrs Ballweg9
Sandra Ballweg I agree to all ofthem except the one concerning the fence
Russell Ballweg Item #
Ronald F ply Item # 9
Dorothy wood Then we will have to hear it if you don't agree with that
Sandra Ballweg That's fine
Dorothy wood Then we'll drop that down Thank you
REGULAR AGENDA
Robert Miller Item #9 is Sandra Ballweg
Ronald reply Please Mate and your address
Sandra Ballweg Sandra Ballweg, 2933 DuBois Place Virginia Beach, Virginia
Ronald Ripley And tell us what bothers you about the consent item we had
Sandra Ballweg okay First of all you said that I could only have 10 children I've
always been licensed for 12 I've been a licensed daycare provider for Virginias since
1990 and before that with the rr litary in Germany It s never been a problem with m
neighbors And you Mated here that it"s because cars come back and forth That's never
been a problem with anyone So, that was nay first issue I think that I should be allowed
to keep 12 especially considering there's a shortage of daycare providers in this area and
I ire worked with Social Services for so many years The second one there are always
two adults there for the children so they're under constant supervision The building
code requires that all places that have pooh have a four foot high fence which I have,
which is away from the pool and there's nothing there that the children can stank up to
Item
Sandra Ballwe
Page
climb over a four foot chean link and then scale a four foot aluminum side to get into the
pool since we have removable steps from the swim-ming pool itself and the hot tub has ar
locking top to it So they can't get in the hot tub period So those are my two issues
Ronald Ripley okay Yes, Ids Wood
Dorothy Wood Ms Ballweg I noticed that you if e can get to the pictures I noticed
that you had swings adjacent between the pool and the hot tub
Sandra Bal l weg s
Dorothy wood Did you plan to keep yeah see the swings are right next to the hot tub
and the pool
Sandra Ballweg No That's been moved That was during the construction process of
where the fence was
Dorothy Wood And do you have the fence now`
Sandra Ballweg Yeah Up on the other side ofthe hot tub you can see the sliding glass
doors, they were putting them in when the ladies came out and the chain link fence runs
from the house, straight back and all that's cleaned up And it's all beside the children's
sand box now, the swing set There's a chain limit fence that runs from that shed that 1s 1n
the hack corner there you see, it comes from the back of that to the house which separates
the play area from
Ronald Ripley Could you please identify yourself'
Russell Ballweg Excuse me My name is Russell Ballweg
Ronald Ripley okay I' M sorry
Russell Ballweg I m sorry
Dorothy Wood My problem is that I think that ehild.ren can often climb chain lint
fences Being a grandmother, I ve seen children climb there very easily
Fussell Ballweg Well that's true But unsupervised they're likely to do most n thin
but they re not unsupervised I guess that s the issue and it's life saying the four foot
fence is all that s required by City Codes around any type of pool for hotels, private use
and whatever City Code only requires a four -foot fence
Sandra Ballwe My licensing lady from Social Services carve out and she looped at it
She has a Rasters in Childhood Development and she was very pleased with it She
Item #
Sandra Ballweg
Page
thought that this was a good idea on what we had done also I'm a grandmother too so
my children are never unsupervised
Ronald Ripley Betsy'?
Betsy Atkinson You don t have a picture of the new fence you put up That would help
us a lot
Sandra Ballweg No, I don't
Robert Miller It s a chain link fence
Betsy Atkinson Yeah
Sandra Ballw It's a regular chain link fence
Betsy Atkinson But we could see how it would separate
Ronald Ripley Yes Mr Biller
Robert NhIler You have children that you're already keeping at your house and how
many'
Sandra Ballweg Yes Right now I have five
Robert Miller Okay And you said you ve been licensed for 12 gears or since 1990
Excuse me
Sandra Ballweg Since Io
Robert Miller For 12 children'
Sandra Ballweg I've always had 12 children
Robert Biller And that was through the State`
Sandra Ballweg The State of Virginina through Richmond
Robert Miller But you never had a permit for the City`
Sandra Ballweg I never knew this was necessary until they told me this time
Robert Miller Sometimes that happens But currently, you ve been dealing with five
children, not 1
Sandra Ballweg Five Right
Item
Sandra Ballweg
Page 4
Robert Diller Have you ever had 12 there)
Sandra Ballweg Oh yeah, when I was in Stafford
Robert ert Miller Here at this, I m sorry at this address
Sandra Ballweg At this house's No Never had a license at this house This is the first
time I've applied for a license in Virginia Beach
Robert Miller Okay so the license warn t at this house I apologize
Sandra Ballweg And that's when they told me that I had to corne to zoning In Stafford,
we didn't have to do anything with zoning apparently
Robert Miller Oka
Ronald Ripley well, the 10 versus the 12 1 thinly it's been the position of this
on=ssion in the past to encourage daycare within the communities and home health
care We think that helps with the betterment of our City quite frankly But the 10 versus
the 12, we reed to cut it off at a point and I think when looping back we've seen a lot of
applications come through and staff` has seen a lot of applications come through and if we
start 12 as the mark then we start to get more and more of this and 1n our opinion the 10
is a more reasonable number You can argue that all day long It's just our opinion
When you go to Council you have the opportunity to argue that also so you have every
opportunity to continue to argue we re making a recommendation we think 10 i
reasonable and that we think the safety of the fence is a big issue And, you know, the
idea of just having a pool, if you didn t have a pool there, I thinly the idea of a small fence
like you're talking about that would be fine but the pool is something we feel that draws
the lids over and that s the reason it was amended to your conditions
Sandra Ballweg I have a fence there
Donald Ripley I know, you have a four -foot fence there now, I realize but we are and
our recommendation was to approve a fence that was six foot sinular to ghat you have
right there Once again, you can argue that at Council if that's the motion that comes off
this Conunis s i oil when we take a vote Yes, Bob
Robert Miller well when we talked about this before, I thought we were going to
approach you all in between and perhaps talk about the fence and we did We talked
about the six-foot fence"
Russell Ballweg No
Robert rt Miller I rn sorry I'm trying to get Carolyn
Item
Sandra Ballweg
Page
Carolyn Smith Yes And they didn't agree so that's why this is here
Robert Miller oh okay I have a pool at nay house and I happen to know that the code
is, so that's not a problem as far as understanding that I think it s really a question of
whether or not we agree that s enough of the situation so it's a question of the six-foot
fence versus the four -foot fence But you approached therm and they didn t agree with
the six-foot fence okay And you already built the four -foot fence and that s probably
the reason why you don t agree with the six-foot fence
Russell Ballweg It's already in place now
Ronald Ripley I can understand your concern
Sandra Ballweg And I've had Social Services out We're lust waiting for this
Donald Ripley Betsy
Betsy Atkunson Bob, I know Carolyn did you work on this applicat=9 Bob talk to
me about the 10 and the 12 children She said she had and I don't know if you were here
when she spoke that she has a license from the State of Virginia to have 12 children, but
were recommending 10 and I think were happy to go along with staff s recommendation
but what triggered that 10 versus 12 number`s
Robert Scott There s really a critical point here The point is hoer much you want t
rely on the licensing that the State does9 This is a land use matter I think you need to
look at what you have approved in other slnular cases Barge in rrund the lot sizes
involved here and the size of the other lots in the neighborhood and the nature of the
neighborhood And I think what we're trying to do when we say Io 1 s just trying to gear
kind of toward what has been shown to work in neighborhoods like thus in the past As a
land use matter, now another way you can look at it but you've never done this is to say
"well let the Mate deal with it through the licensing,' whatever they go along with is
okay with us They're not really look -in cr at land use natters They're just loolung at the
operation of the facility and the qualifications of the operator and so forth If you want t
look at a land use matter, which I think 1s your job then you kind of got to gear 1t to what
you know works and doesn't work based on situations you've run into like thus in the past
because you really do deal with a lot of these So, there are things that can be relied on
wfuch I think that s why we came up with that number on the other hand I don't want
to tell that there s a lot ofscience to it, 10, 12 it varies from day to day I don't know
how they operate really but it lust seemed used upon what has been approved in the past
on lots of this size and neighborhoods like this seemed to be a reasonable number
Betsy Atkinson If we approve 10 today, could they come back later and ask for two
more 1f they chose to' fir- Chairman, they already built the fence and I think with two
adults there all the time I don't have a problem with this fence that is already built I
Item
Sandra Ballwecr
Page
hate to have six-foot wooden fence down the noddle of my yard but I do think the 10
children is where we should linut it It s just my feeling
Ronald Ripley Mr Baum did you have a question)
John Baum The only thing I see is before going to Council having a more current
picture than that but that s causing the confusion
Russell lallweg Yeah, that really doesn't really give justice to the yard anyway
Ronald Ripley Dot wood has a question
Dorothy wood I agree with Nis Atl.xnson on the to children l thinly if you get into 1
you re getting into a more commercial application and this is where we have the
commercial daycares in business areas and since this is a residential area and we do have
neighbors who would certainly be affected by the noise I could not go along with more
than 10 children I d like to make a motion that we approve this application with the five
Conditions but Changing the six-foot fence back to the four -foot fence that we had
originally Is that acceptable Kay`? Excuse me Going back to the four -foot fence that
they have now
Ronald Ripley we have a motion by Dot wood and a second by Betsy Atkinson
Robert Miller iller And this is for 10 ehaldreril
Dorothy wood Ten ehuldren and four foot
Ronald Ripley Any other discussions? Let"s call for the question
AYE 10 NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT I
TKINS N
AYE
BAUM
AYE
CRABTREE
AYE
DIN
AYE
H RSLEY
AYE
NULLER
AYE
RIPL Y
AYE
S LLE"
AYE
STRANGE
AYE
vKS
ABSENT
WOOD
AYE
Ronald Ripley By a vote of 10-0 the motion passes Thank you all very much
Russell Ballweg Thank you
rp'
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM City of Virginia Beach — Amend the City Zoning Ordinance pertaining to
dimensional requirements for nonconforming lots in the F - S Residential District
MEETING DATE January 28, 2003
0 Background
n Ordinance to amend the City Zoning Ordinance pertaining to dimensional
requirements for nonconforming lots in the F - S Residential District
Recently ently concerns about the provisions of the 1994 amendments have been
expressed by residents and property owners in the R-5S District, specifically
within the Shado rla n neighborhood In response to those concerns,
Counilperson Maddox requested that the City Council refer to the Planning
Commission an amendment to the City Zoning Ordinance removing the
provisions of the 1994 amendments On October 8, 2002, the City Council
passed a resolution referring the attached amendments to the Planning
Commission directing that the Commission forward their recommendation on the
amendments to the City Council within 60 days
■ Considerations
The City Zoning Ordinance CZ notes that the - S Residential Single -Family
District is for'developed areas where single-family dwellings exist on lots with
fifty and sixty foot frontages " (section This district is primarily found in the
Oceanfront area, particularly the Shadowla rn neighborhood, however, there are
small pockets of -bS located in other areas of the city
Prior to 1994, the CZO as adopted in 1988 provided that within the -S
District,
0 Where one substandard lot is owned separately, that single lot could
be built on,
0 Where adjacent, nonconforming lots are owned by one entity, one of
the lots could not be sold separately for development Lots had to
meet the minimum lot width of 50 feet and minimum lot area of 5,000
square feet as specified in the zoning ordinance for - S
In 1994, the City Council amended the - S District regulations to allow for
development on substandard lots as follows
R-5S Amendment
Page 2 of 2
C] Lot must be a minimum of 35 feet wide and have a minimum of 3,500
square feet in area,
11 Remaining substandard lots must be resubdivided to conform to the
regulations of the City Zoning ordinance for the R-S District
The 1994 amendments also included the Shadowlawn Design Guidelines as part
of the Comprehensive Plan to provide a design template for the development of
the substandard lot
The proposed amendment would eliminate the provisions added in 1994 Thus
development on substandard lots could occur only as provided for in the pre-
1994 CZO
Staff recommends approval There was opposition to the amendment
■ Recommendations
The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 9-1 to deny
this request with a recommendation for City Council to create a Citizens'
Advisory Committee to address the issue
Since the Planning Commission public hearing: a meeting was held between
representatives of the Shadowlawn neighborhood and representatives of the
Tidewater Builders Association to discuss alternatives and Mr Maddox has
explored alternatives with both groups At this time, Mr Maddox is requesting
that the amendment be heard as advertised on January 2 , 2003 and has
prepared an alternate version The alternate version indicates that the
amendment will not be effective until one year after adoption This one-year
period will allow property owners to take advantage of the 3 t exception and
have a plat recorded if desired
Staff recommends adoption of Mr Maddox s altercate version
a Attachments
Ordinance
Staff Review
Planning Commission Minutes
Recommended mended Action Staff recommends approval of alternate version Planning
Commission recommends denial
Submitting Department/Agency Planning Department
City Manager
"U
1 Requested by Councilmember Richard Maddox
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CITY
1IN ORDINANCE PERTAINING T
4 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENT FOR
NONCONFORMING LOTS IN THE R- 5
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
SECTION AMENDED CZO §502
WHEREAS, the public necessity, convenience, general welfare
and
good Zoning practice so require
10
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY of VIR I IA
11
BEACH, VIRINIA
12
That Section 502 of the City Zoning ordinance is hereby
13
amended and reordained to read as follows
14
Sec
502 Di,mensmon l Requirements
15
1
Nonconforming lots
17
I)
Where a lot has less than the minimum requirements for the
18
R-5S Residential District and said lot has continuouslybeen
19
a lot of record, in single and separate ownership from
20
adjacent property, prior to and since the passage of this
1
ordinance, said lot may be developed for any purpose permitted
22
within the R-5S Residential District
3
(
However, if the owner of a lot which does not meet the minimum
4
requirements of the -5S Residential District, is the owner of
5
or becomes the owner of another substandard lot ad3aent to it
26
and located in the same R-5S Residential District, he is not
27 entitled to the exception in 1 above In this instance, the
28 owner of the two 2 r more adD acent substandard lots must
29 combine the two 2 or more lots to form one which will meet
30 or more closely approximate the frontage and area requirements
1 of the ordinance applicable within the R-5S Residential
32 District
33 (3) The owner of contiguous substandard lots is prohibited from
34 conveying one (1) or more of the substandard lots with the
35 result that both the grantors and the grantee possess lots
36 entitled to an exception from the minimum lot requirements
37 {4} Status as a single and separate owner may not be acquired
38 after enactment of this ordnance by selling a parcel and
39 reducing the remainder below the minimum lot requirements nor
40 may an owner of several contiguous nonconforming parcels
41 combine them so as to leave a substandard lot, and assert the
42 right to exception in (1) above
43
44
45 FtCSiJr?T3$rr"Cr.Lti��IP17C1-a=rr--srn�^a�Ci� i � �-r7 fM-��r�L n4Tr
46 ,
47
48
49
50
K
51
,
5 2
st-rsf-rcc�rrs r -_ '_ - -:
53
54
55
56
,
57
58
5940
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
arr
67
68-01
69
70 fCC�
71 For the purposes of this section, lots are not regarded, as
72 ad3 acent where they form an " L " # part of one being contiguous
73 to the other
74 COMMENT
T
75 This amendment wall delete the exception that allowed one substandard 35 foot lot when
76 other substandard lots were resubdivided in the -5S Resident -jai Zoning District
77 Adopted by �he Council of the City of Virg---nia Beach,
78 Virginia, on the day of , 2003
79 CA-8626
80 Proposed\czo org 502(e)
81 R-4
82 January 22, 2003
4
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
10
11
12
1
14
1
1
17
18
19
2
21
22
2
24
25
2
27
28
Alternative requested by CouncilmembeL Richard Maddox
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CITY
SON I NC O DI NANCE PEP'I' I N I N C TO
DIMENSIONAL FE UI E�IENT FOR
NONCONFORMING LOTS 1 I,, T H E F- S
RESIDENTIAL DIST ICT
SECTION AMENDED
WHEREAS, the public necessity, convenience, general welfare
and good zoning practice so require
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY CF VIRcINIA
BEACH, VIR INIA
That Section 502 cf the City Zoning Ordnance is hereby
amended and reordained to read as follows
Sec 502 Dimen m nal Requxrements
( e ) NonconfoIrming lots
(1 ) Where a lot has less than the minimum requirements for the
- S Residential District and said lot has continuously been
a lot of record, in single and separate ownership =rom
adjacent property, prior to and since tree passage of --his
ordinance, said lot may be developed for anv purpose perm fi t d
within the -S Residential District
() However, if the owner of a lot whicn does not meet the minimum
requirements of the - S F esidentidl District, is the- wne-r of
r becomes the owner of another substandard lot adjacent .-o it
and located in the same R-5S Residential District, he not
entitled to the exception -in l ; above In this in tar�c %-he
owner of the two () or more ad3 acent su �andard ots mist
combine the two or more lots to form one which will meet
30
or more closely approximate the
frontage and area
reguirerrents
31
of the ordinance applicable
within the R-5S
Resadeitial
32 District
33 (3) Tne owner of contiguous substand rd lots is pr-r-ij - T=tj
4 conveying one ( 1) or more of the substandard �cts tr,e
35 result that both the grantors any.. the grantee possess
36 enr itled to an exception from the minim im lot requ i rerun -Tit s
37 () Status as a sangle and separate owner mav not be ac q1�l red
38 after enactment of this ordinance b selling a parcel and
39 reducing the remainder below the minimum -ot requiremen"Es nor
40 may an owner of several contiguous nonconforming parcels
41 combine there so as to leave a substandard lot, and assert the
42 right to exception in (1) above
43 ,,
44
4 Z
4 n
..
de6
i lai 1JILUILk
Wt6th cnf- th.Lru-y L-Lve �- � .._
51 ,
3n
54
2
56
57 n
.. G
e in t r t IF Idl er e S' q 1
k./ LJ LI
...� ti ti —A s..r+ 1 �
61
! V
6
7.
t
65the
66 �rrr
67
6
7
71 For the purposes of this section, lots a�e not r e g a r d e J d
72 adjacent where they form an "L" , pant of one being coat -iu u t
73 the other
74 Thi-s ordinance shall e eci-ve si- 6 rnontns froj�l L-re :
75 of adoi-o
6 COMMENT
77 This amendment will delete theexcept-ion that allowed one substandard 35 toot lot m hIL ix other
78 sub tandard lots were resubdivided in the R-5 S i e id ntial Zo nino District It N, III hC LIf4.LtiN L SIX
tv
79 months from the date of adoption
80 Adopted by the Council of the amity of: �rgiria Beach, .Iirginia on
1 the day of , 2003
3
1
Dr posed c c 502 fie}
-4
a n u a r r '21 ,21 2 0
APPROVED AS To CONTENT
Planning Dep rtment
7�PPROWED AS To LEGAL
SUFFICIENCi
it AtYorne yr sice
4
n"I
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH - R=5S
AMENDMENT/# 12
December 11, 2002
n Ordinance to amend the City Zoning Ordinance pertaining to dimensional
requirements for nonconforming lots in the R- S Residential District
Background:
The City Zoning Ordinance CZ rotes that the R-s Residential single -Pauly District
is for "developed areas where single-family dwellings exist on lots with fifty and sixty
feet frontages," (Section This district is primarily found in the oceanfront area,
particularly the Shadowla ern neighborhood, however, there are small pockets of R- S
located in other areas of the city
Prior to 1994, the C, as adopted in 1988, provided that within the R-S District,
0 Where one substandard lot is owned separately, that single lot could be built
n,
0 Where adjacent, nonconforming lots are owned by one entity, one of the lots
could not be sold separately for development Lots had to meet the minimum
lot width of 50 feet and minimum lot area of 5,000 square feet as specified in
the zoning ordinance for -S
In 1994, the City Council amended the R- S District regulations to allow for
development on substandard lots as follows
0 Lot must be a minimum of 35 feet pride and have a minimum of 3,500 square
feet in area,
0 Remaining substandard lots must be resubdivided to conform to the
regulations of the City Zoning Ordinance for the R-S District
The sketch h below shovers how this might occur
Planning Commission Agenda
December 11 ,, 2002
CITY OF VIR INIA BEACH — R- s AMENDMENT # 12
Page 1
30 ' 30 T
1
i
j
100
' 1
i ii _ i i i• _ i i�
1
1
1
1
loop f
1
■ � � � � i � i � i i� i ! i �i �
The 1994 amendments also included the Shado vla n Design Guidelines as part of the
Comprehensive Plan to provide a design template for the development of the
substandard lot
Proposed Amendments:
Recently, concerns about the provisions of the 1994 amendments have been expressed
by residents and property owners in the R- S Distnct, specifically within the
Shadowla ern neighborhood In response to those concerns, Councilperson Maddox
requested that the City Council refer to the Planning Commission an amendment to the
City Zoning Ordinance removing the provisions of the 1994 amendments On October 3,
2002, the City Council passed a resolution referring the attached amendments to the
Planning Commission, directing that the Commission forward their recommendation on
the amendments to the City Council within 60 days
The proposed amendment would eliminate the provisions added in 1994 Thus,
development on substandard lots could occur only as provided for in the pre-1994 CZ
0 Where one substandard lot is owned separately, that single lot can be built
n,
[I Where adjacent, nonconforming lots are owned by one entity, one of the lots
cannot be sold separately for development lots must meet the minimum lot
width of 50 feet and minimum lot area of 5,000 square feet as specified in the
zoning ordinance for -S
Evaluation:
The proposed amendments are recommended for approval
Planning Commission Agenda
December 11 22
CITY of VIRGINIA BEACH — R- s AMENDMENT T 12
Page
Item # 1
City of Virginia Beach
n ordinance to amend the City Ordinance pertaining to the
dimensional requirements for non-confo=ng lots in the l - S
Residential District
December 12 2002
REGULAR AGENDA
Robert Miller The next item is Item #121, which is the City of Virgirua 1n the 1 - S
Residential District and Karen Lasl ey is going to make a presentation
Karen L sl y Hi These amendments to the - S District were requested by
Councilman Maddox the Shadowla n Civic League came to lira this fall and requested
that this change be put forward and I rn going to give you a little background on the 1-S
L rstnct and quickly go through the amendments Let me move this out of the way
John Baum Karen, who are you"
Karen Lasley I'm Karen L.asley, the Zoning Adrrnnrstrator for the City of Virginia
Beach Dkay9 what we call the Shadowlawn neighborhood is composed of two old
platted subdivision, the Shadowla n Heights plat and the old Pinewood plat And the
area is all zoned 1-S, which allows only single-family residential dwellings The
district has a rrunimum lot width of 50 feet and a rrunimum lot area of 5 000 square feet
The side yard setbacks are fire feet on one side and ten on the other And the 1-S
district has some unique regulations pertaining to non-conforwng lots Thus is the only
distract in Virginia Beach right now where we have these regulations and it came into
play because there are many non -conforming lots in this neighborhood This is primarily
the area impacted by the amendments The area colored in purple there, west of Pacific,
south of Virginia Beach Boulevard down to l udee inlet First the Shadowlawn heights
plat It was onginally platted back in 1924 The majority of the lots are 30 feet by 100
feet There are many corners that are 45 a little wider by 100 feet Several of the blocks
have 25 feet by 100 lots with -foot corner lots And they vary a little bit on the water
s to size And here s a portion of that old plat from 1924 The pinewood plat was put to
record about two years later in 1926 and the malorlty of lots in this neighborhood are 2
by about 122 feet when that plat was originally put to record there was also some deed
restnctions that were recorded And they require two lots combined to make a building
site In that one, we re sure it was nearer the intent to build on a 25-foot wide lot And
there's a portion of that old plat As this area developed most buyers brought two or
three lots and built small brick ranch homes on them, primarily single story dwellings and
e have a few examples from mostly the Shadowlan neighborhood of these older
original ranch homes that were built Then in the 80s the desirability of this
neighborhood went up It's near the beach and it's a lovely unique nelerhborhood
Property values went up and we began to see infill and redevelopment on single lots
Two and three story homes were now being constructed on these 25 or 0-foot wide lots
and the result was really not in keeping with the character of the neighborhood and
Item #12
City of Virginia Beach
Page
density became an issue and a concern we got a few examples rune of these homes
that were built mostly in the 80s on the narrow lots It's a big contrast between that and
the ranch homes Due to concerns regarding this infill, new regulations were adopted in
1983 If you owned a substandard lot and it was owned separately and had always been
owned separately you could go ahead and build on that substandard lot but where
adjacent non-confornung lots were owned by one person or one entity they could n
longer sell those off separately for development Any lot had to meet the nunimurn lot
width of 50 feet and the lot area of 5,000 square feet We ve got some examples here
Those lighter dotted fines mean that those two lots are owned by the sane person So, if
you had two lots you had to keep them together You couldn't sell off one separately If
you owned one lot by itself and you owned that by itself for 25 years you still could go
ahead and build on that lot But it really took four of these 0-foot lots before you could
subdivide and get two lots out of it, o o or 0 but they had to be at least 50 feet
wide These new rules from 1983 generated concern among some of the residents Some
property owners felt that their property rights had been taken They had bought three
lots, built a home on two and thought they had that third lot in the bank to sell off when
their kids went to college or when it was time for their retirement The next slide shovers
that scenario They wilt their house on two lots thought they could sell off this one for
development and they were no longer allowed to So after a lot of long neighborhood
meetings and discussions among the neighborhood, Council members and developers,
there was an amendment adopted in 1984 And it was a compromise It allowed property
owners to convey one substandard lot for development provided that the lot had a lot
width of 35 feet and a rrunimum of 3500 square feet in area and the remaininor lots had t
be re -subdivided to conform to the requirements So, in that scenario we looked at before
this property owner could not re -subdivide, end up with a -foot lot with his ranch house
on it and sell off the -foot for another hone And with that amendment the side yard
setbacks for those substandard lots were also reduced to 5 on one side, five on the other
side instead of the exrsung 10 This allowed for a 25 foot wide home we also adopted
the Shado lawn Inf ll Guidelines as part of the Comprehensive Plan and that encouraged
those homes built on the -foot wide lots to be compatible with existing ranch homes
And it's all about proportion and design we've got a duple of examples You can see
how much better this second example fits in between the two ranch houses then if you do
the design this way But those guidelines are only recommendations in the
Comprehensive Plan They're not required unless someone has to go the BZA for the
vanance or for a subdivision variance then we can attach them as conditions Okay,
today That's proposed is to delete that -foot exception There's concern among the
residents that the 35 lots are resulting in dwellings that are not compatible with the
neighborhood and they're again concemed about the resulting density There are a
duple ofpictures that show some construction on -foot wide lots This one was taken
at the end of September I wish I could have gotten back out there It's probably finished
by now I'd like to get a new picture And then here s another -foot wide lot But
that's where we are today The amendments are on your agenda for discussion The next
slide just shows the map and we just have a duple other examples 1n the area Are there
any questions for e`
Item #12
City of Virginia Beach
Page
Ronald Ripley Questions9 So in other wards if we do what s suggested here then you
would go back to be able to build on a single lot
Karen Lasley No you wouldn't You'd go back to the 83 regulations
Ronald Ripley All the way back
Karen Lasley where if you owned them 1f you want to adjacent the lots, you have to
keep there together unless you can meet the code 50 feet by 300 square feet
Ronald Ripley okay
Karen Lasley okay`?
Robert Miller we have ten speakers and I need to ask Lincoln Potter are you opposed or
support9 Can you tell rne9 Support or opposed`
Lincoln Potter I think building a house
Robert Miller .lust pick one or the other It's a yes or no question almost Are you
going to be speaking in support of the stern or opposed to it'?
Lincoln Potter She's proposing Let me understand what's she's proposing
Robert Miller I'll tell you what you're speal ng in opposition we have four speakers
in support and then we'll have six speakers in opposition Randy Sterling
Ronald Ripley we need to group the speakers
Robert Miller we need to get moving And you each have five nunutes according to
hearman Ripley
Ronald Ripley Yes
Robert Miller Randy Sterhng9
Randy Sterling Mr Chairman, members of the Planr ng Comnussion My name is
Randy Sterling I live at 732 Terrace Avenue and I'm today representing the
Shado la ern Civic League as their President I'm appeanng here in support of this
petition And I think a little hastory would be helpful just to let you know in March I was
here opposing a variance on a 3-foot lot that you approved for ten additional feet that
made that lot buildable It was a corner lot we're not concerned about lots that are
platted that is people who live and own the lot but our concern is when that property 1s
then sold to a subsequent owner that the lot changes I'll give you an example we had a
house on 135 foot lot single dwelling That lot was sold and there are now three houses
Item #12
City of 'rrinia Beach
zD
Pacre 4
on that lot, two on 0-foot c of mung lots and one three story on a non -conforming lot
We move from a single house to a village And I think that is what we're opposed too
We think that we did a good job getting the word out to the neighborhood and I rn going
to just quickly give you a little history It came up in April at a civic league meeting It
was unanimously approved to iook into requesting a modification because that seemed to
be the best gray to deal with this issue We then included a petition with our next
newsletter And we hand circulated a thousand of these to our neighborhood when those
petitions were returned and obviously we didn't get then from everybody we then went
and formed a comnuttee to go door to door and visit those people who had not responded
And, we took with us a proposal that I'm going to pass around to you, showing pictures
having the ordinance and explaining to anyone who needed to ghat we were attempting
to do After we collected those petitions we still had folks who had not responded and
e made a second visit to homes that had not responded we collected a total of 334
petitions 325 in favor, nine opposed we then went to the next step and asked
Councilman Maddox to bring this forth And that s where we are at this particular time
I know this issue creates controversy and some of the controversy has to do with
nu s understanding we re not seeking to tale anything array from anybody that s already
existed But under this ordinance, the provision is that if I own a 100 foot and you own a
135 foot and a third person buys both of those instead of two houses there, we now have
five And that s a situation that we don't feel comfortable with we don't think it
conforms with the guidelines for the Shado la vn There are nine pages of those
guidelines Understand that it's not law But it certainly should be adhered to I know
that Property rights are important to folk and so when we talked about the individual
who has the -foot lot that's an important consideration But I also ask you to consider
the people around them Those four people behind them and on each side and in front
also have some rights And when you build a three-story house that backs up to m
property or three of those homes that certainly effects the value of my house, and so
when you consider the individual Let's consider not only the individual who has the 35
foot lot but let's consider the impact that has on the neighbors on each side, in the back
and across the front Thank you
Ronald Ripley Thank you Mr Sterling
Robert Miller Jeff Knowles
JeffKnowles My name is Jeff Knowles I live at 724 Terrace Avenue I m an architect
and a contractor, 'Tree President of Boeing Construction Not to often probably you have
a contract come in and ask for less density That's why I'm here Maybe it's m
architectural side It gives me the good planning and knowledge of what is right for our
community what we've seen in the last two years especially is the tread to develop as
Mr Sterling said to buy a corner, tear down a single fanuly re -subdivide it and build two
and most tines three lots And it is truly changing the character of our neighborhood
Along with doing that to make the house property profitable setbacks are being
rnaxinu ed on all four sides The -foot height restriction is being coaxed out on most
of these homes And quite honestly Nis Lasley referenced the Shadowlawn Design
Item #12
City of Virginia Beach
Page
Guidelines I rn not seeing that enforced either and I m not sure it can be but it truly is
changing the character As Dandy said, we have tried to take the time and educate our
neighbors Get their input and thoughts before we came before you I'm not sure we
succeed because I think I can possibly make your day a little shorter I think there are
three neighbors that are concerned They had pre -platted lots that are less than 5 000
square foot They want the possibility of selling that in the futureWe're not opposed to
that If the property is pre -platted and whether it's built on or not it should remain And,
I think by law it has to be I think there s some confusion on some of our neighbors who
weren't able to make maybe to the civic league or get our letter out obviously Soo did,
over Soo that signed the petition I think now are neighbors are difference between late
o's nud o's is now our neighbors can really see the impact It started and you saw a
few examples of some of the older developments Now it's happening on a lot ofcorners
and I think our neighbors are truly seeing the impact that this non-conforrrung lot
allowance has on the character of our neighborhood our neighborhood has some of the
largest trees in the Virginia Beach and many of them are coming down for these
properties one of the developers that has been doing a lot of this work is somebody I
know and in fact, I was talking to hire a couple of weeks ago and he said "'you n or
most of the profitable lots have been sold, I don't think you're going to see a whole lot'
Well he is today and I have a feeling he's going to speak So, either I changed his
thoughts on the way to thin or he is still apposing I suspect he s still opposing me
Much means them are plenty of combinations of lots that can be purchased and this n n-
conforrmng lot allows an increase density It s definitely profitable our real estate
values have gone substantially up and it s obviously profitable we as for your
unanimous approval of what we asked and allow that future lot when subdividing will be
no less than 5,000 square foot Thank you for your time
Donald Ripley Thank you very much
Robert �&11 r Kim Whitley
Kim Whitley Hi Thank you for your time Kim Whitley I live at 715 Winston Salem
Avenue I'm a professor at the college of William and Mary Yes I have a rather long
commute I looked at homes in Virginia Beach I could have lived in Birdn ck Labe
where there s `densed packed" if you will small yard I choose the character and beauty
of Shadowlawn and it's potential And I own one of those lots I m sorry My house is
built on three lots So, I'm directly affected I support the deletion of this because of the
wonderful character that Shadowlan has I think it would change as I see things
happening It's really going to develop It's really starting to effect how I feel about the
neighborhood because it is a warm wonderful close neighborhood I think it s close
enough And I really don't like to see the way things are happening and I like the close
access to the beach All those things are important to me So I support the deletion of
the amendment to keep the character of the neighborhood just as it is
Ronald Ripley Thank you very much
Item # 1
City of Virginia Beach
Page
Robert Miller Bruce Dove
Kira Whitley I would lire to say that the reason I m here is because these people slid go
around and do a great job of making sure we understood the issues that were before u
And that is why I rn here
Ronald Ripley Thank you again
Bruce Dove Bruce Dowe, President of Pinewood Park Civic Associate league Sorry
Last meeting we all agreed to support the amendment pertaining to non} onforniing lots
and for the same reason we figured it would be detrimental to the character of our
neighborhood Aside from that the area has all distinct individual hones There's not
one hardly the sane I appreciate you listening to me Thank you
Ronald Ripley Could I ask you a question`s Did the civic league Grote or did the
executive board vote's
Bruce Doe The civic league we had a small meeting and we agreed to it
Ronald Ripley Okay Thank you very much
Robert Miller Lincoln Potter
Lincoln Potter My name is Lincoln Potter l also own a house on Winston Salem
Avenue Just as, from my point of view any house that I ve ever saw that's built on a
very small lot 3 5 foot for example to nee is rather ugly It s ,lust to hard to get setbacks
for the side lots on either side of you which is normally 5 foot and then you go up three
stones or something and they're ,lust ugly houses So, I don t want to see a neighborhood
that close to the ocean and the central part of Virginia Beach turn into all these tall,
skinny ugly buildings Thanks
Ronald Ripley Thank you
Robert Miller Jason Hanull
Jason Hamill How are you doin99 My nwne is Jason and I actually live In
Ronald Ripley Jason's
Jason Hanull Hanull
Ronald Ripley Thank you
Jason Hanull we re not sure I've got some questions I own a lot that's on the water
and I want to mare sure I ve read the amendment and what not and it doesn't clarify at
Item #12
City of Virginia Beach
Page
least in my mmnd what happens to an existing lot that hasn't been developed Because
depending on some of the measurements and the wary it's plotted right now, it might fall
under 5 000 square feet Now, I m concerned because I bought the piece of property as
an investment F m not opposed to the entire reorganization as far as what s deemed
acceptable to build on but I want to confirm in having in written is that what we have
even though is plotted is a lot that can be built on I don't really who to talk to I've read
that thing I rn sure you guys have 1t in front of you To me it s kind of vague
Ronald Ripley we have two people with the City that know that answer Mr Scott or
Ms L sley if they would like to answer that
Robert Scott You got one lot
Jason Hamill Correct
Robert Scott It's already platted
Jason Hanull Correct
Robert Scott It aught be less than 5,000 square feet
Jason Harmll. Correct
Robert Scott I think you" ire going to continue to have the right to build on that lot
Jason Harmll I don t want to
Robert ert Scott It s not going to be affecting single lots like that
Jason Harnill I just don't want to get down to point down the road and it is an issue If
we're going to make amendments or change things around, shouldn't this be 1n writing
that says 'hey this lot is going to be conformed"'?
Robert Scott Isere is what we can do for you If you can after the meeting, you can get
with ibis Lasley the Zoning Administrator, she can write you a letter like that,
specifically relating to your lot If you identify that lot we'll tell you in wnting what you
can and can't d
Ronald I pley Mr Scott" He will have to meet the setbacks
Robert Scott well, yeah
Ronald Ripley You do have the five on one side and ten on the other reverting back to
that, so you have 15 feet of setback
Item #12
City of Virginia Beach
Page
Jason Hanull Yeah, I would imagine I bought it as a plotted lot I'm supposed to be
able to build on it
Ronald Ripley Do you know how wide the lot is'
Janson Hanull Probably 7- 0 I third it's about 47 feet across
Ronald Fupley Okay Fine
Jason Hanull Okay Thanks
Robert Hiller Bart Sinanis
Bart Sinanis First I want to apologize for nay dress attire I didn't think this was all
about I'm adjacent with Jason Hanull It's actually we both oven the lot It's actually
lly
three lots that we do have Back to the bottom line, we are concerned if it's going to be
n issue if this does pass We do fall underneath the 4700 square foot mark but hack to I
think I should be okay really put me at ease we would life to have something in venting
that I would be in the clear
Robert Scott If you could give us the specifics of what your situation is we'll give you
the specifics of what your answer is we'll put it in writing for you
Bart Sinanis You want me to do this now or we can do it after
Robert Scott whenever you want to do it Dater would be better actually
Bart Sinanis `yeah That's fine 1 mean other than that as long as I meet any footage that
would be fine
Robert Miller You and Jason are not the owners of the same lot You have two separate
addresses so I assume they are two separate pieces of property You own one and he
owns one Is that correct'
Bart Sin ms That is correct The rruddle lot, we financially split between the two of us
Robert Miller So, you do own the thard property in the muddle
Bart Sinanis Exactly
Robert Miller A lot of technicalities How do you like that one Karen.'?
Bart Sinanis I've got it right here, if you guys want to see it
Robert Miller I thinly Karen can help you with this
Item #12
City of Virginia Beach
Page
Ronald Ripley If you want to get with her after the meeting
Bart Sinanis okay That is fine Again, as long as I state my point that we spent quite a
bit of money on this lot and want to nee sure we get a return on our investment
Ronald Rapley we appreciate you corning down I'm sorry, Betsy?
Betsy Atkinson You have a piece of property that you both There are three lots and
you both own, it together All three lots, because but you have two different addresses
Legally if looked it up I would see your name and Jason's name and the property
description would be three lots'
Robert Miller No
Bart Sinanis No I own one lot, he owns the other lot and in between we both own it
Betsy Atkinson Oh, okay Sorry Very good'
Robert Diller Thank you for that
Bart Sinanis Thank you
Robert Nfiller A good challenge there Phalip Morgan
Philip Morgan My name is Philip Morgan I live at 627 Delaware Avenue I'm the
instigator of this whole mess that we're discussing today
Ronald Ripley we appreciate that
Ph-ilip Morgan I found out in 1992 that I have been Paying taxes on an accessed value
n the 30 foot lot that I had next to my home as though that lot was buildable and sellable
and I came to find out that it was neither So for 16 years, the City and the State managed
to collect real estate takes as though I could do whatever I chose to do with that 30 feet
and I found out that I was not the only person residing in Shadolan who had that same
problem So, I took it upon myself to contact the other property owners who were as
upset about all this as I was And we started by going to the Zoning Appeals Board and
sling them what they could do and of course their answer was they couldn't do
anything It didn't have anything to do with setbacks so it was pretty much out of their
area Teen it gent to the Planning Comrmssion who also turned us down and we finally
got the civic league to back us and say that they felt what had happened to us was unfair
and unjust We took that and the petition that we had signed, which was approximately
200 of them and we tools them to the City Council who felt that our cause was just And
agreed to change the regulations to ghat is currently in effect This was a cornpronue
between the City and the property owners who were in that situation They wouldn t
Item #12
City of Virginia Beach
Page 10
grandfather it but they slid change the regulatrons to indicate that if we added five feet t
the 0-foot lots that we owned then that lot could be buildable or sellable I seat letters
by fax to the Planning Commission I hope you all received them and had an opportunity
to understand ghat I rn trying to say here The lots in Shadowlarn originally were
platted 20-25 and 30 feet You bought according to what size home you wanted to build
on it There are homes on lots that are 20 feet wide and run approximately 40 feet deep
which would give you about 600square foot homes and they run from that size all the
way up to 2500 feet and 1 don't see where 29 possible subdivision brining forth 35 foot
lots is something that we all should be that concerned about in regards to the rights of the
property owner And I ask you to consider rejecting the petition Does anyone have any
questions'?
Ronald Ripley I think we do Mr Hiller`
Robert Miller we have been told thus morning and 1 thinly that we heard that there was
38 You're saying there are 29 lots`
Philip Morgan There are 29 that if the subdivision took effect on those 29 lots 1t would
provide substandard lots The other nine would not
Robert Miller Okay The 29,when you say substandard are you tall ng about the
foot lots which are now allowed
Philip Morgan Thurty-five or forty
Robert Miller what is now allowed`)
Philip Morgan Raght
Robert Miller Okay
Philip Morgan I'm sorry, one other thing I would like to bang up I ve heard mentioned
several times that in the last two years that these subdivisions have accomplished many
three story buildings I regret I have to contradict that but to my knowledge there has
only been one three story building built in Shado Ala v a confomu g lot, not a
substandard lot Everything else has been two-story
Ronald Ripley Any other questions9 Thank you Mr Morgan
Philip Morgan Thank you
Robert Hiller Claudia Cotton
laucha Cotton Good afternoon I am Claudia Cotton I'm staff Vice President of
Builders Services for Tidewater Builders Association Please to be here this afternoon
Item #12
City of Virginia Beach
Page l l
We were called by some of our builder members at the end oflast week that rule a
living building in these resort neighborhoods in Virginia Beach They advised us of this
change that you re considering today I'd like to make a few comments about this
ordinance change that you will consider for making your recommendation As I ve heard
today and of course recently, we understand that the civic league and interested property
owners work together to develop the 1994 compromise ordinance that is on the books
We urge you to reconvene the interested parties to address their concerns first before you
recommend the changes be legislated According to the staff I don t believe that a
meeting has taken plane It s further my understanding that the 1nfill guidelines for the
Shdolawn neighborhood are in place to address and as we ve seen today to address
infill development Maybe they need to he adjusted or evaluated to dete=ne whether
they can continue to serve the neighborhood Again we ask you that interested parties
reconvene first before you legislate changes Paced with an increasing need for new
infrastructure and services and reduced funding by both local and state, I'm sure the City
of Virginia Beach wants to continue to grow smart New in ill housing is vital to
maintaining a healthy housing stock And it's also vital for taking advantage of existing
infrastructure, which is a key to growing smart To virtually eliminate thus option for the
home buying public in the City s mature 1 - S neighborhoods seems to run contrary t
your efforts to contain residential development north of the Green Line and direct growth
towards existing service areas The finial concern is the owners of the lots that have been
paying taxes to the City based on their pernutted uses and design classification There's
been an assumption that a single fauly home could be constructed on those lots if the
qualifying cnterla could be met that was agreed upon in 1994 Removing this option i
certainly a concern of ours for those property owners it would effect that removing this
option takes the property owners value without compensation or recourse In closing,
please reconsider the action on thus amendment today directing the interested parties to
meet as they did eight years ago to find a compronri a Thank you for your consideration
of our comments
Ronald Ripley Thank you very much
Claudia Cottons I'll be happy to answer any questions
Donald Ripley Any questions`questions9 Thank you
Robert hiller Steven Blshard
Steven Bishard Commissioners Steven Bishard I guess I'm unfortunately the bad guar,
the developer of many of these lots in this neighborhood I do agree with Jeff Knowles in
many respect and I can understand that the neighborhood is very concerned about the
way their neighborhood looks I have lived in Shado vlawn over the course of the last ten
gears f ve lived for about eight of those gears I now live in the north end I ve seen a
lot of changes in the neighborhood I feel most of there are for the better We don't have
a redevelopment authority in this City we don t have a way to get rid ofold dilapidated
homes that are on many of these streets and this current ordinance allows for such
Item #12
City of Virginia Beach
Page 12
thing I'm corwng here on three planes of interests Number one as a builder developer
owner of Bishard Development Corporation I also own Ocean Development LC I'm
also a property owner We have three rental properties, one in Shadowlawn two in the
Pinewood area of Virginia Beach And agoan, I've been a past resident of Shadowlawn.
and seen the transition Again I feel that its overall positive There have been some
issues Where have been some homes that have been built like to think they aren't ours but
it's all up to interpretation There have been some homes that have been built that I
personally don t like, and I think that 1s where a lot of the heartache is and that's where a
lot ofconcern is If you follow the infill guidelines or some other method to balance the
interest of property owners with the interest ofthe community that nu ht be better
served The character has charged but I can tell you that it is demand dnven we can t
get these homes built quick enough for the people who want to live in this neighborhood
It's very sought after and again that rwght be why they want to preserve this
neighborbood to getter their liking It's very much demand driven like I said It's a boost
of the local economy when we build homes 1n these infill areas I think we under
estimate that You can go to the Oceanfront areas and see many construction workers in
n area that is - o years old They're out there and they're worl tng Many farmhes
are fed up with the homes being built i mentioned this a little earlier Most of these re -
subdivision that are taking place, the econonnics do not work for an individual to come
into Shadowlawn and buy an incredible looking home and tear it down It just doesn't
work You have to buy an older dilapidated home that needs to be torn down for the
most part And that's what's really happening The one that Mr Sterling was speaking
about that was not be as the developer That was Juanita Holling's property It was a
very old home They probably would have loved to see two homes on there which you
could done but the law allowed for three and the home was dilapidated and really had no
use and you couldn t do much with it It wasn't very marketable Also, I think the infill
building creates an environment of constant updating of the neighborhood I live at the
north end I see the north end changing for the most part it s a positive change Where
are some things that very much concern me there but for the most part it's a very positive
change And that is also free market driven Government doesn't have to get involved
We don't need a redevelopment authority and the government doesn't have to get
involved in this action But the most critical and important arguments lie on the corner
stone of our society and that has to do with property rights You have to ask yourself are
you willing to forfeit any individual's property right to accommodate the interest of the
neighborh od9 That's a very delicate balance a very, very delicate balance It has to be
taken very seriously I would side with the property rights but of course I have invested
interest in doing so and I own three properties in the neighborhood If an individual is
taxed on the property by government, I feel they should enjoy every bit of the fruits that
property hears, every bit of it And maybe a compromise is a way to go I have a
personal friend and she can't be here today She is very elderly and very ill She owns a
home on 9`h Street in Shadowlawn sitting on three lots She is 91 years old She s not
going to be with us much longer And, if dus ordinance changes says she has t go to a
nursing home and this is a sob story case and this is the worst it gets
Ronald Ripley You re running out of time
Item #12
City of Virginia Beach
Page 1
Steven Bishard Okay This is bad as it gets but nevertheless she gets one building
homes If the ordinance stags, she'll get two building sites and be able to sell this
dilapidated hone to a developer He 11 make more money on it than she other wise
would Do you have any more time"?
Ronald Ripley we have a lot of speakers
Steven BYshard Just a couple more things and 111 be out of your way
Ronald Ripley lake it very brief
Steven BYshrd Okay If we could follow the inf~ill guidelines and possibly meet with the
neighborhood to come up with a compromise maybe that is where we start and we night
be able to come up with a compromise Maybe make the lots 40 feet and strictly follow
the infill guidelines and have a review comnuttee versus just eradicating property rights
And that s it
Ronald Ripley Thank you very much
Steven Bishard Thank you
Robert Miller Eddie Bourdon
Eddie Bourdon Thank you Mr Chairman And I'm speal ng for myself on tbas one
I'm not a mercenary on this Because I do feel strongly about this and I did have the
absolute privilege of representing Mr Morgan when we righted the wrong back in 1994
because unhke what's going on today which is out in public and open and everyone got
notice, back in 1988 when the first attempt to take away the property rights of those
people whose lots were being taxed as individual building sites was put into law without
notice, th-is time at least the notices went out w1uch is nice The first thing that I wart to
say is that to my knowledge thus has never been an issue in pinewood And, as long as
there aren't houses built in. Pinewood, on one single lot those deed restrictions are
absolutely enforceable and I would urge the folks in that community and the civic league
to be diligent in enforcing those deed restrictions that houses have to be built on two lots
I thank they been conscripted into this issue but I'm not aware of there being houses being
built in that neighborhood on single lots and they can t be with those restrictions as long
as those neighbors who ors lots in that subdivision as they are all platted lots enforce
those deed restrictions As far as Shaowlan is concerned, these are platted lots and I
think some of the confusion is in the terms and the dascussion that some of the proponents
of the rollback that s taken of people s property ngts use because everyone out there is a
platted lot It s a legally platted lot What the compromise that was adopted in 1994 with
great deal of effort by staff and by City Council at that particular time, Mr France and
even Mr Parker who was more favorable resulted and I think} the best possible
compronuse and with the example that Mr Sterling gage when there were three houses
built on this piece of property where there was once one well there was four lots there
Item #12
City of Virginia Beach
Page 14
There are three houses there on what was four lots So, there is some compromise from
the property rights per pective of the individual owners of those properties and just to
simply sav sorry, we're out of here depending on who owns and when you own it, in
terms on what you could build, that is not what our constitution is all about That's not
what our c ountry i s all about These people and there are just a e`er of therm left who
have the opportunity They still have to pay the monies You have to come in and re -
subdivide to create a lesser non-confomung lot that is the best way to handle it I ve
done a lot of these I've been involved with this from the beginning The only issue that
is out them in my opinion is something that was in fact over looked was the corner lot
scenario The -foot lot requirement that you re -subdivided and you could only plat one
of those non-cnforrrung 35-foot lots in place of a -foot lot didn't deal with the cant
situation That's probably an oversight that aught need to be looked at and addressed
And possibly also dealing with attempting to make the guidelines more a mandatory
situation is also something that rrught need to be addressed But, Philip Morgan has lived
in this community for longer that I've been on this planet I've learned from him what I
know and he would know better that the infill lots that have been re -subdivided to create
35 foot lots have not been where the three story houses have been built And, I think
some folks aught be a disingenuous when they talk about the three story houses but I
don't know that for a fact I've not done a survey but when Mr Morgan says it's true
then I absolutely, positively believe it to be true I think that this proposed rollback to
take away the rights of these few represents an effort of the majority to he to radical upon
the property rights of a small rmnonty and should be rejected
Ronald Ripley Thank you very much Do we have any more speakers'?
Robert Miller No sir
Donald Ripley okay Do they want to rebut okay Ainght Betsy, do you have
comment`
Betsy Coent No I just want to ask a question Karen's I know this is a request of
Councilman Maddox and how we move this from here to there, it"s a point that is not
going to make a lot of difference but is there another way we can get like a citizen
con=ttee together to really look at the ordinance Maybe, rbe, rolling lack is not the
answer Maybe e if you had a house on a 35-foot pride lots maybe e you can tear the house
down and have 45 foot wide lot rather than say you have to have one because it would
not be 50 feet wide It wouldn t meet that requirement I mean it just seems to me that
saying well rollback to the old We're not really looking at it We're not really studying
it And if we could get a citizens commttee and come up with all different ideas and
look at the corner lot scenano and look at if you got one 30 foot wide scenario and maybe
really do a survey of the neighborhood orhood and say "'okay ', these people have options It
sounds life 97 percent ofthe people are not even going to be affect by this at this point
Karen Lasley Sure
Item #12
City of Virginia Beach
Page 1
Betsy Atkinson It just seems to be a better idea I don't know what anybody else thinks
about that
Karen Lasley The one thing about forming a citizens coy urutte , Council put a time
lirrut on this for you to respond And you guys have been so busy unfortunately we kind
of pushed it right to the edge So you rrnght want to make a recommendation to Council
that they form such a con-irmttee to explore it further
Kay Wilson You all need to have some response to Council at tfus meeting This is the
end of your 60 days They require that you respond within 60 days but you could always
make the recommendation that they form the comrmttee
Robert Miller we had a little bit of nurnberisrn here We had 325 people sign
something and we had 100
Karen Lasley That was the original petition that cane from the City
Robert hiller Okay we had 1200 this morning was that the total lots?
Karen Lasley Total number of property owners that we sent notices too
Robert Miller Then, we got 38 lots but nine of them are not a problem where does this
come from inxtially'P Is there a specific incident that prompted this9 If you can get back
to the first place where the problem started we can get a good conversation going or do
you know`
Karen Lasley You aught want to ask the curie league There were a couple of re -
subdivisions that specifically caused concern Yes
Robert Miller See that 5-foot lots, those re -subdivisions that created And were they
the corner lots as Eddie was Just mentioning9 was one of there that corner lot'?
Karen Lasley I don t know addresses I know that one was on the water with four lots,
couple of flag lots You right want to ask the civic league
Robert Miller Okay Civic League I'll sponsor somebody to come rack up' Jeff
Jeff Knowles As I stated earlier I think ghat we ve seen is a tread Yes there have
been numerous lots
Robert Miller 1 m trying to get to the genesis of this inhere did this start`
Jeff Knowles Well it started again, two gears ago one particular currier lot
Robert N iller A corner lot' 5-foot 1W
Item #12
City of Virginia Beach
Page 1
Jeff Knowles There were two 5 s and one 35
Robert Miller And was the 35 the corneO
Jeff Knowles Center No sir it s in the center Where is also two waterfront lots that are
just now being developed, a total of four lots three 50's and a 35 There 1s another parcel
on Delaware Avenue that was I believe 90 Feet, a 50 and a 40, clearly a trend I don't
have all the locations I can speak to three story hones I can name six bones right now
In the last two gears that are three stories
Robert Miller The height if the height regulation that is allowed It's nothing something
that were dealing with today we re really dealing with the land use I think is ghat we're
trying to make our focus on
Jeff Knowles It is a trend and that is why we're here Again, I think in 1994 and 1988,,
yes it was an issue the property value was an issue Now we can see the impact it has
having it allowed to be continued really, in the last couple of years with our property
values increasmg it has become the trend And it s a trend that a majority our
neighborhood don't want to see continue because eventually I twill impact our property
values
Robert filer If the guidelines were support more vigorously would that in some form
temper the situation
Jeff Knowles I think that would in some form help Yes It would it surely prevent
three-story or even two and half story You get a lot of two-story with a dorm or
windows and high pitch roof looping down on one stony I tturik that would possibly
help I think the bottom line is 50 feet wide is small enough 35 foot is too narrow
You're dealing with five and five-foot setbacks One of those neighbors probably has
another five-foot setback we're not a neighborhood that wants ten feet between Houses
We want to maintain a little bit of our privacy and R-5S zoning is the smallest zoning
ordinance allowed in Virginia Beach 5000 square 50 by 100 we happen to have this
restriction that was a cornprormse 1n 1994 I would like to speak of one other stern again
to satisfy some ofthe folk that were unsure Mr Scott may confirm but Section 502 to
mention requirements Item El for the non-confornnng lots clearly says that if it's a
continuously owned lot of record, single for separate ownership from adjacent property it
can be developed So l think the guidelines are very clear that if it 1s a pre -platted plot I
understand that there is rrusunderstanding of lots Yes, we have lots but m talking about
a planted plot very clear 1n the ordinance That can be developed It just has to meet the
setbacks And we're not asking for that to change We want those folks that have held
that lot for future develop or Jason and Bart to be able to sell that lot that they bought for
investment white 1 prefer not to see it on a 35 foot lot, they have all the right They
bought if for that purpose
Item #12
City of Virginia Beach
Page 1
Robert Miller Then again, it seems back to the guidelines That might help 1n that
situation also in additional to what is again, a concern with regard than a 50 foot lot
Jeff Knowles I think it would help I think what you will find from those folks 1s that
they would never build that on that piece of property while they live there They bought
it for investment They bought because they didn t want the developer to build that third
house It's a pnme example of why we're here
Ronald Ripley Thank you very much Does somebody want to sponsor Mr Morgan`
Charlie Salle' I have a question for Karen wren, I m still trying to figure out the
numbers here as to how many people we are affecting by this I guess in Shadowlan
whtch they say primanly the area affected do we know the total number of lots in there?
Karen Daley No And they're grouped
Charlie Salle' How do we detemune if 30 or 40 people can possible he there'?
Karen La ley From the map, w1uch shows ownership
Robert Niiller The GPINS
Karen Lley what's
Robert Nfiller I'm sorry, the G IN numbers`
Karen Lley well, they don't happen to be on this map but yeah from that Like that
picture that we had up before with the dotted lines You can tell who owns three lots,
who own four lots In both Shdowlawn and pinewood there is a potential for 38 more of
the -foot wide lots Where are 38 people that own at least 90 feet of frontage or more
Okay, it takes at least 85 feet to subdivide under the -foot exception You ve got to
end up with one 50 and one 35 And ghat Mr Morgan was getting at the nine people
own at least 120 feet of frontage So they would be able to subdivide into two lots even 1f
this is passed They" ve got enough to have at least two 50s It's a hard thing to talk
about
Charlie Salle Maybe I didn't understand you The exception as it exists now, do you
have to have owned those lots at the time of the passing of that exception Could you go
in now and buy four lots and title yourself with the exception'
Karen Lasley Yes you could
Charlie Salle' what prevents a developer from going in and buying any number of lots
within Shadowla n and eonung up with enough property t develop two o and one 359
Item #12
City of Virginia Beach
Page 18
Karen Lasley Yeah, he could do that
Charlie Salle If you tear down houses you can do that now
Karen Lasley Okay say if there's three lots and three lot The guy with the three lots
just can't go buy one lot from the neighbor
Charlie Salle' Say he bought four lots from
Karen Lasley One person`
Charlie Salle No three different people Let s say four different people I bought all
four lots and they were all substandard and I started combining and re -subdividing four
lots, can I get this 354=9
Karen Lasley You have to go back to how you got the four lots`
Charlie Salle I bought there
Karen Lasley Nobody can sell you just one lot out of therr- three
Charlie Salle Let s say there's four existing lots
Karen Lasley Four single lotsP Okay
Charlie Salle Four single farmly dwellings
Karen Lasley All these have been owned separately
Charlie Salle And they're owned separately
Karen Lasley okay
Charlie Salle' And I divide them up Can I take advantage of the exception?
Karen Lasley Yes you can I can tell you It's an estimate the 38 is an estimate But
there's very few lots left, singles Most everybody owns two some three There are very
few singles so I don't see that occurring too often but it could You're right
Charlie Salle And the reason it would not occur a lot is because there are enough new
houses there that wouldn t be torn down if you wanted to go m
Karen Lasley No
Item #12
City ofVirginia Beach
Page 1
Charlie Salle' I rn not sure I follow you I'rn not sure what prevents any developer from
buying 5 o lots and just corrung up with a 3 5 -foot exception for ore of therm or whatever
Karen La ley They could
Charlie Salle' Okay
Ronald Ripley Betsy has a question of you
Betsy Atkinson Karen if we do away with these guidelines, does that mean we do away
with the Shdowlawn Guidelines too' They were all kind of together
Karen Laley There wouldn't be any need for that really
Betsy Atkinson There would be no more Shadowlawn Guidelines
Karen Lasley Yeah They were designed to apply to the -foot pride lots There
some concept in there that could apply They would be great to use them on 0-foot vide
lots too You know, we can maybe adjust therm a little hit
Ronald Ripley Anything else` Thank you Laren okay Discussion?
Betsy Atkinson I'll discuss I mean I know we have to move than Board to City Council
because Kay told us that But F d like to and it's very confusing on how to vote on this
I would really like to recommend to Council that they put together a citizen group t
maybe look at this a little more clearly, to cone up with more options than just going
back to the old rules It s kind of the way I feel I'd listen to other Comnussioners I
know whether we vote up or down today, Council is going to be struggling with this issue
in about a month
Ronald Ripley Gene9
Eugene Crabtree I sort of agree with Betsy We should see if there is some war we can
encourage Council or the community themselves to reach a cornprorru a on this so that
we can keep the integnty of a person s property rights as well aiding the neighborhood to
improve and prevent the development from just going in there rough shot and doing that
I don't know how to do it though
Ronald Ripley Bob`?
Robert hiller wren your last statement I m just clanfying You said that the
guidelines if we approve this would remove the guidelines or they would be ineffective
because they do not set up for this new scenario9
Item #12
City of Virginia Beach
gage 2
Karen Lasley well, they were set up for the -Moot wide lots I think there are still
some things in there that are worth beeping and maybe we can just look at that with the
updated Comprehensive Plan since that's ongoing norht new
Robert Miller But we would actually in some sense
Karen La ley we wouldn t need them
Robert Miller We would.n t need them`
Karen Lasley No
Robert Miller That s not what I heard from the community They sounded like they
really liked them
Karen La ley Well, they were designed for the -foot lot If this amendment passed
you won't create any more -foot lots Although there are still some out there that
haven't been built on It would be great if they would adhere to them
Ronald Ripley oh Kay if you either vote this up or voted it doom with the
recommendation or pass 1t on with the recommendation?
Kay Wilson You need to pass it on to Council one-way or the other
Ronald Ripley one way or the other Either up or down
Kay Wilson You can always have a recommendation I mean you all do that even with
applications You all have been known to make recommendations with your
applications
Ronald Ripley But what I'm hearing, what I'm sensing at least is that the
recommendation is to form the citizen advisory co nuttee or whatever you want to call it
and work through the size issues and work through the guideline issues perhaps
strengthen therm to improve the neighborhood Either gray you vote
Robert biller I'll make a motion that be the point and that my motion is that we not
approve the change at this time and that recomrnendation being held as the reason why
e would not approve it at this time until such time as the community's had a chance to
invest more time together at least to discuss these items And I in particularly concerned
about the guidelines I think that s something
Randy Sterling Could I address that before you make your decision`
Dorothy wood No
Item #12
City of Virginia Beach
Page 21
Ronald Ripley No
Dorothy wood And 1 11 second the motion
Ronald Ripley No we can't
Robert Miller That s any motion
Dorothy Food I seconded your motion
Ronald Ripley A motion from Bob Miller to deny and with recommendations for
Council to create a Citizen's Advisory Cornrmttee to address the size and the guidelines
in the neighborhood for development and second by loot wood And, you need to
understand that this Conunission is in a box we have to make a decision one way or the
other And this is the only way to pass it on for us because if we don't, Council will act
on it s own within in 60 days and we're at the end Yes, John's
John Baum Not persuading anybody else all thus discussion about private property rights
makes me think I'm entering the country 20 years ago Over and over, I heard people say
the man ought to be able to do to his property what he wants to do I said wart, add the
part unless it hurts someone And that is whatwe're really dealing with here I'm going
to agree with Mr Sterling and Mr Knowles You're making the property and narrow
properties are more valuable per square foot And the adjoining neighbors that's
valuable I don t think that's right act So, with all due respect I'm going to vote odds
with Mr Miller this time I hope I get away with it I won't be corning back
RobertMiller John, I don't necessarily disagree, I just think that's the point of
discussion that we re sitting here and we're doing committee work literally We re trying
to resolve all the issues within we've got information that some of which may or may
not be complete and I don't think it s time to make that decision, but we do have to act
for Council, so as we typically do, I'm sure it 11 be completely supported by whatever
decision we make when it gets to Council
John Baum One other thing on what we add You know the Council appoints four
people, there used to be five But the City Attorney and the City Manager and the City
Clerk are sitting there together The assessor s office is somewhere else And I've often
wondered if these charges that Council in it's wisdom makes whether they are related to
the assessor fast enough because people ought not Pay taxes on property they can't build
on and I certainly go along with that and I know Council in the past has found some
errors when they pay people as far back as three years I think that is all they could go
back and pay them for the mistake but maybe the communications ought to be very good
with the assessor and I'm sure he s going to do his job
Ronald Ripley will did you have a question
Item #12
City of Virginia Beach
Page 2.).
William Din Do we have to deny or approve this item in order to pass on
recomrnendation9
Ronald Ripley That"s what council's telling us
William Din Can we just pass on a recommendation?
Kay Wilson I think a recommendation is either aye or nay It's either yes or no You
could always have a reconunendation in the sense of fir Miller's motion that you
suggest that they do a co puttee
Ronald Ripley Kay, we have no more time
Kay Wilson No more time
Ronald Ripley ,And I feel by voting this way myself but I'm going to vote for denial
because of that
Charlie Salle' Roy`
Ronald Ripley Yes
Charlie Salle I'm going to vote in Favor of this motion although I m not real happy
about that position either But nay feeling is that I don't think this issue has actually been
studied enough and at this time there's an existing ordinance under which people have
certain expectations on the way they can develop their property and the war people buy
and sell property and as far as I ran concerned until we or somebody has an opportunity to
better evaluate thus situation, I don' think it's time to change people's expectations again
Them having been changed twice now and I'm not sure that without something more in
way of studying this problem and to find out how many people we are affecting and what
really is occurring out there that it's time to change the rules again which maybe for
another temporary period time So my feeling is that at least as far as Planning
omrmssion member I can't give a better recommendation to Council then to
recommend that they not adopt this ordinance unless we have more tune and more
information available to us
Donald Ripley Any other comments9 we're ready to vote
AYE 9 NAY I ABS 0 ABSENT I
ATKINS N
AYE
BALTM
AYE
CRABTREE
NAY
DIN
AYE
HISBY
AYE
Item #12
City of Virginia Beach
Page 2
MILLER
AYE
RIPLEY
AYE
SALLE'
AYE
STRANGE
AYE
V KoS
WOOD
AYE
Ronald filer By a vote of -1, the motion passes
ABSENT
Minutes of Shadowlawn Civic League Meeting, May 8, 2002
Call to Order
Meeting was called to order by president Randy Sterling
�,pr al, of Minute
Randy gave members time to reach the rr mutes of last meeting Jim Flanagan made motion
for approval, it was seconded and passed
Treasurer's o
Randy read the tneasw&s report vnth balance of $2,204 32
Pyresidenfs- Report
] Randy apologized for not puttwg signs for meeting up in the neighborhood
Carter Turpm called Randy vnth regrets about bemg unable to get the necessary ABC
rinit for "Span Fling" The m-Muran s are planning to do a "Neighborhood
Appreciation Day" perhaps m the fall Dinners discounts etc There was some discussion
as to why the ABC did not issue the perrut
3 Neptune Festival is looking for voiuntoers Randy has been tasked to be chatnnan of the
ctisassembly of the Neptune parade He as asking for volunteers See hun Lf interested
"Clean the Bay ay", Saturday, June 1, 9 oo a m to noon Resort Beach Chic Lwgues are
going to do 2th St to Farm Fresh Anyone who watts to help, pick up yellow trash bugs
at 607 1 th St Dress in your Shadowlawn T-shuts to show them we are represented
CgMMLtIMgeRgrts
Jun Flanagan reported on statue of Ditches &Revitalization He stated tonight is the
adoption meeting at City Council for the funding for our project and it is on the agenda
No negatives from our representative counciIman We wild know on i l 40 p m news
Mary Sydney Barker reported from the Friendship Patrol The Friendship Patrol are
volunteer arnbftcl rs for Virgmia Beach They walk the beach extending a warn
welcome to tourist and local visitors, providing mforna=on and enco�na persona]
decor m accordance with the rules of common cosy The goal is to help create a
welcoxmng faunly friendly atmosphere Tins arose firm obnoxious behavior mostly later
hours at the beach All Civic Leagues and other City orga m tons have been asked for
volunteers Only one, three hour sluft, in groups of three, on one of three Holidays--
Memona l Day, July 4th, or Labor Davy Contwt her if you are interested
Minutes of Shadowlawn Civic League Meeting, May 8, 2002
Jrfimh d BM§mess
ZONING CHANGE dy has recived 31 signed petitions He vn1l open discussion with
altemate pro and con Discussions will be Imuted to 3 minutes, then when everyone is
finished, we wail go around again if your have addhtion,af remarks All remarks are to be
addressed to the chair Speakers, please come to front, identify yourself and give your
address
In favor, Jinn Flanagan, 708 Arctic Ave Inspite that we are closing the barn door, w1ule
the horse is ahady out, so many have already been modified and adjusted, there are still
some lots available He would like to stop the d n of the nerghborhoo�.
Opposed, Cason Banco, 227 l ledhtemmean Ave There are a lot of people who have
smaller lots who have not developed them, vnthout notice, they thought they were
buildable lots then property assessment went from $40,000 to $5,00 He thinks it is a case
of taking Property value from them Mother ism, if are indr r ual owned a corner tat '
with " lot next to d They could subchvide lots to o' by ' deep, facing def erent
streets if you wfll amend this mod cation to let these people replot their lots, l would go
along with the Zomng r ange
In favor, Jeff Knowles, 724 Terrace Ave He is passionate about stopping single
plot split into three house lots with ties removed. The ordmance now allows lots that are
now plotted 3 5' x 100' to be built on. we are not trying to take those lots away from these
owners There was further discussion on these two situations
]neutral, David Owens, 815 Terrace Ave He leas two concerns about what is going on at
at the end of 800 block of Tice One, two story houses are a fire hazard to one story
houses Contactors when they bmid do not care about the people who live on that shwt
They fill ditches up, the tadpoles come, then the se Is
In favor, Dune Wlespre, 710 Witon Salem Ave The end of her suet is an example of
what cbanged zoning code represents One nice house on the water,, then was sold, house
was moved, and one slur house bur.lt with intention of building the second The two
owners decided to purchase the second lot so no house would be butt Shadowlawn'
problem is density and it needs t be reduced She also referred to houses on Greensbom
behind her residence Again drainage problems
apposed, Greg Holda, 400 Baltic Ave He was just back from city council meeting, 31st
street project approved tonight We are not effected by a few houses being built in
Shadowlawn, we are effected by commercial bwlders They will be votmg on Rudee
Loop in July More tall hotels and parlaag problems
Randy expressed that we should be concerned with both issues, local and commercial
Minutes of Shadowlawn Civic Lzague Meetmg, May , 2002 '5.
In favor, Betty Savage She likes living in Sowlawn, but the complexion is changing
More houses, leas Parking, and of that she is not m favor
Opposed, second time around, Cason Banco restated hus opposition to zone chamge that
residents That are gemng ready to retire mnth smaller lots, not be protected Changes are not
well advertised, so some people will be blind sighted Ttus a moral issue Discussion
followed about nohficabon of issues
In favor, JLm Flanagan, adverse rnapact as mention previously, there has been adverse
impact on other ux ividuals used upon the increase m number of homes, change in
e He is s pnmd no lawsuits have occurred, if flow of land and watm are
disrupted Contmued discussion for approval of change
Jeff Knowles, no real opposition heard tonight we need to come out stwng % of
residents Get council person to make recommendation tion f our petition, and go on from
there
Bill Eger, 601 Virginia Ave We have two big problems we are over looking The drainage
problem is bung impacted every time we put up new houses It is up to the city to see that
thss disruption does not occur Increase bwlding means increase cars, thus a parking
problem Ambulances can't get through sametmes Drainage 8c parking are key
problems
Jun Flanagan, comments that there is a lit to what a city can do because neighborhood is
so flat
R=dy stated ditches are in best shape they have been in a long hone, because of the cites
recent effort to unclog the ditches The srtuatian will be relieved, as the storm water tax we
pay comes back, m the $7,500,000 improvement that are proposed for 2007 We will be
mach older when this happens
The next step, is door to door, to get petition signed by % of residents We vn11 form a
comnufte to lay out plans to push for signa=es Pl a e, if interested m helpmg, shy
after meeting
Randy asked for a motion to table the issue so he can bang it back up when he needs t
Motion to table, passed
New Bigmes
o New Business
Meetmia Adioumed
RespectUly submitted,
j7V
Civic League Officers Spung Fling
President
Randy Sierimg Cancelled
6758021
rsteritnQwans net
Vice President
Jon Rico
437 9371
jnzzoo)rmlassocrates com The Spring Fling planned for May 181h has
Secretary been canceled The restaurants were unable to
Netta Hathaway secure the final permits from the ABC
428-0623 Commission Outdoor food preparation
Treasurer together wrth beverage sales was not possible
Kelly Bowers This is the second year that plans for a Spzmg
720 Winston Salem Ave Fling were disregarded because the necessary
425 9424 perrmts could not be obtained
Next Meeting Much hme was devoted to orchestratrng this
When event- a sir►cere thank you to Carter and his
4Tuesday team for their effortsMP 194
Wnere ry Ditches
Caake Eiementa School
Guest Speaker jAi
Kane
You may have seen crews from the City
leaning our ditches and drainpipes This
process began as a result of flaadutg at the
4051 kad
awn net
new construction on Terrace Avenue The
crew chef looked at the ditches and told his
We're On The Web supervisor that the neighborhood was m bad
shape and as a result the ditches were
President's Corner cleaned The cause of the drasnage problems
Change, the process of in our neighborhood is yard waste PLEASE
blight or revitalization DO NOT PUT LEAVES AND GRASS
is vtiewed through the CLIPPINGS IN THE DITCHES By
lens of neighborhoods m�autur�tthe ditches we cart avoid future
Charges in housing
n
conditions do not occur drainage problems in our neighborhood
in a vacuum It does not
occur independently
hate by house, mahout
=austng a negative �
err tan the
ic ,orfiood
3e sure to get out and Be advised that we may have radar umts
rote May 7t' working in our neighborhood Remember to
bile with the flow of traffic and walk
aamst or facing traffic Dave, wadk and
bike careftWy to assure a safe and enjo abic
summer for everyone
Zoning Change
At our last Civic League meeting a propos-di
was presented to modify the zoiumg
ordinance for lot size in our neighborhood
The proposal would eliminate the
development of newly subdivided thzriy-
hve (35) foot lots _
The proposed change, while unannousl
approved at our last me tm& is not w t oul
controversy We wnU devote bus oath's
meeting to its debate
Enclosed with thus newsletter is a petition
outlining the proposed amendment This
petition is an effort to stop buxldzng on a Ioi
that j,s only thirty-five (35) feet wide It wil;
also eliminate houses that are built only IQ
feet apart (each house having a 5 foot
setback per side)
s a first step rn this process we need to
gather signatures Please complete, fold
and mail the petition or attend dw month's
rneetmg for more information
This is the opportunity to have an impact
on the development of our neighborhood
Too often the mterests of developers are the
only voices heard by the City These are
our homes, take the time to protect your
vestment Make an informed decision on
our neighborhood s future and ensure your
vote ts taunted
PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE PETITION
On Apri19, 2002, the Shadawlawn Civic League unanimously approved a motion to
request a modification to the zoning ordinance which allows development of newly
subdivided nonconforming lots which are 35' wide and 3500 square feet in area. We
request that Article 5, section (e) {5} be deleted entirely Article 5, Section (e) (5)
states the following
5 The owner of two (2) or more contiguous substandard lots in the R-SS Residential
Distnct which are substandard as to lot width and/or area as of the date of the
passage of tus ordinance, may convey one (1) substandard lot to a separate owner
and such a lot may be developed for any purpose permitted in the R-SS
Rewdentia.! District, provided that the lot has a trunimum vadth of tturty-five (35)
feet and area of thuty-five hundred (3,500) square feet, and provided that
conditions are satisfied as follows
i All contiguous substandard Rats in common ownerstup shall be re -subdivided
so as to describe no more than one (1) substandard lot of not less than thirty-
five (35) feet m width and thirty-five hundred (3,500) square feet in area The
remauwng contiguous substandard lots steal! be re -subdivided so as to describe
a !at or lots in cosifornmty with all regulations in the R-55 Residential Dtistnct
The re -subdivision of all contiguous substandard lots in common ownership
shall be descnbed on one (1) subdivision plat
ii Owners who seek to develop on substandard lots shall be encouraged to
adhere to the "Shadawlawsc Infili Development Guidelines" as descnbetl in
the Comprehensive Plan
As an exception to section 502 (a) (6).., the cmnunum side yard setback for a substandard
lot in the R-SS Re%dential District which is developed pursuant to this subsection shall
be five (5) feet
Th-ts revision to the zoning ordinance will aflow existing nonconforming lots of
record to be developed but aU newly subdrvided lots mast meet the mmi um
requiremtsts of our 1- S zoning which requires 50' minimum lot width and ,
S F of ama
❑ I support the proposed zoning change.
❑ I oppose the proposed zoning change
Nye
Address
Phone
t d 6 C; 1 v 11
Stephen white - City Zoning Ordinance Proposed Amendment Notice - R5SResidenbal
District
From Sett Funk!' SFUNK@mbakercorp cosy
To <p1anadm@vbgov co
Date 1 l /too
Subject City Zoning Ordinance Proposed Amendment ]Notice - R5SResidential District
This proposed Zoning Change will have a serious adverse affect on the
neighborhood and the positive valuation benefits on our homes due to the
bOwr paced homes bewg built in our area ft may resutt in many
Property owners in the neighborhood seeing their values decline
sigrHficantly That rn turn wdl result in a market wrth much lower
annual apprewt,an since it will no longer be economically feasible to
redevelop some of the lots with older run down homes
Sincerely
oott and Cathy Funk
Scott Funk E I T
Michael Bakes- Jr Inc
770 Lynnha en Pkwy Suite 240
Virginia Beach 1A 23452
71 5484 (Phone)
7 7 63 503 (Fax)
sfLnWimbakercorp corn
file cumcn %? %2OS ttin hit \Local%2OS ttin Temp\GW TM 12/5/2002
Utz
Current Planning Division
Municipal Center
Building 2 Room 11
05 Courthouse Drive
Virginia Beach., Virginia 3 5 - 0 0
December 8 2002
Dear Planning Comrmssion
Scott and Jacqueline warren
508 Terrace Avenge
Virginia BeachVirginia 23451
Subject Amendment of the City Zoning ordinance for nonconforming lots in
the R,5S Residential DiLstriet
Thank you for taking the ume to hear our concerns about our neighborhood
Shdowlawn our household is in full support of amending the City Zoning ordinance
pertairung to dimensional requirement for nonconfor ung lots in the 1 -5S Residential
District
I grew up in and currently lire in the Shadowlawn hone Acres neighborhood My wife
and I returned to my childhood neighborhood because of its charm For over thirty-five
Years I have lured in this neighborhood and witnessed the demolition of homes and trees
so multiple houses can be built where one home use to stand The past few years have
seen an increase in remodeling and new construction in our neighborhood Although
some of the newer structures are mce, I'm concerned about the density, character and
duality of life this type of development will bnng tern to fifteen years down the road
Please take thas opporturuty to help shape our neighborhood into something that the City
can showcase, the residents can be proud to live in and inal a visitors want to come back
and stag Thank you once again for your time and we respectfully ask for your support of
the ordinance change
Sincerely,
5cAO-twa*7V*%4 Jacq UZLW� COP4& W axvswv
Scott Warren Jacqueline Cox Warren
Stephen White -proposed change to zoning ordinance in Shadowlavm
From Theresa <goIdwcrker@cox n t
TO <pIanadm@vbgov corn
Date 12/8/2002 10 42 P
Subject proposed charge to zoning ordinance in Sbadowlawn
l am a resident of Shadowlawn and am unable to attend the meeting of
the Planning ounc-il on Wednesday However I would lace to voice mar
support of the motion to amend the city zoning ordinance pertaining to
dimensional requirement for nonconforming lots in the R SS residential
district
Regards
Theresa Parsons Clayton
415 Carolina Avenue
4259202
file C WIN T T mp GW) 000 10 HTM 12/9/20020
Stephen White -Zoning Changes/Shadowlawn
From KathyB <kgbrowning@worldnet att n t
TO <pIanadm@vbgov com
Date 1218/2002 10 57 PM
Subject Zoning Changes/Shadowlawn
Please note that l support the proposed change to the zmng ordinance in
hadowle n that will be before your Department meeting on Decemt>er 11 2002
Thank you for your consideration
Kathy Browning
708 Terrace Avenue
Virginia Beach VA 23451-4745
file //C 1WINNT1Temp1GW 100010 HTM 12/9/2002
Yoor C- —Itk i --Z.
�-
y�/
dO,
2 Z.,-5 �
C't 'e'-,
dr
r
LX/.00-M
�.
X-
'` ti•" Y f
J
Stephen White -zone change in Shadowlawn
From 11malt se deer a(t se@cox net
To <planadm @ vbg v com>
Date 1 22oo2 1 10 PM
Subject zone change in S adowlawn
Billy Martin Jr and Dee Maltese do not support the zoning charge Property owners rights to sell should not b
dictated by the homeowners association
We do feel that builders and the communfty can come to an agreement for some architectural guidsl)nes for
homes to be built on 35 foot lot purchases which would allow landowners to sell and builders to build and that
mould benefit both parties as well as the look of the neighborhood once the architectural guidelines were agreed
upon
We had originally signed a petition but did not fully understand the contents since signing that petrt]on we have
realized our mistake e Please disregard the petition with our names on it
Thank you for your consideration to the above
Sincerely
Dee Maltese
Billy Martin Jr
3 Carolina Avenue
Virginia Beach VA 23451
42-04 8
file Oocur nt nd%S ttin r it Local %2 S ttin TW I T i 12/10/2002
Stephen White -Proposed Change to Zoning Ordinance
From 'William Eger bill-e2 @a ra it com>r
To <pIanadm@vbgov corn
Date 12/9/2002 10 11 AM
Subject Proposed Charge to Zoning Ordinance
William J Eger
01 Virginia Ave
Virginia Beach V
41
91 97
Dear Sors
As a resident of ShadoWawn 1 wholly support the Proposed Charge to the
Zoning Ordnance which dears with the size of lots upon which construction is
permited
n street parking has hampered access into side -streets in our area This
includes Ernergency Vehicles AlIowing construction on 40ft wde lots could
increase the number of vehicles parked on these streets and increase the
pos ibilty that an Emergency Vehicle Could not reach its destination
The storm -sewer system ,s already overburdened and dysfuntionaI ne ding
irnprove nvnt {came visit us after a heavy rainfarl) Adding mere load to this
system is tit -advised
I ask that you give the above reasons consideration and approve the
Propoes+d Change to the Zoning Ordinance
William J Eger
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE
http4oin mgn comPga-qe�jgaturesIIunkg!aiI
We HC \Du nt o 20S ettin ht Local % 20 St i \'Temp\GAT } 00004 I- TM 12/10/2002
S Nonconforming Lots
I ai n aware of the proposed zoning ordinance change for the R5S residential district and I
am opposed to any change in this ordinance for several reasons One, the rights of
property owners is a fundamental right in a free society When the government
jeopardizes property rights there must be a compelling govenunent mterest, not
con aunity interest, and there must be compensation Many owners in the R5S district
have benefited tremendously from the current allowance of nonconforming lots Property
owners have received top dollar for their properties and maxirmzed a return on their
investment Two, the allowance of nonconforming lots allows for a free market
redevelopment tool absent the need for government intervention On countless
occasions, the high demand for housing and land at the oceanfront have stimulated an
incredible rise in property values and allowed the beachfront to be revitalised Without
thus tool, the conimumty would remain more stagnate and depressed For example, when
a dhlapidated shack on a large piece of property assessed at one hundred fifty thousand is
replaced vnth new homes each assessed at well over two hundred thousand dollars it is a
win-wm situation for the community and the city Three, the inf 11 bufl&mg environment
in general is goad for our city It stimulates our economy by providhng countless jobs t
tradesmen, inzreasmg the property values, promoting the sale of new homes, and
enhances our duality of life Sunply drive by an oceanfront Seven Eleven store and
examine the numbers of construction workers p trorn ing the stores daily The overall
rise in property values can be attributed to an exponential demand for housing in these
areas and the ability to meet this demand by new xnf ll construction I am a Northend
resident and I can say with few exceptions, l am very happy with the inf`ill redevelopment
t the Oceanfront area For the most part, it provides a continuous improvement to the
area Since I have been an oceanfront resident I have seen constant improvement from
the City enhancing the aesthetics of the Oceanfront, and the development community by
putting money into new homes, offices and other commercial development
Sincerely,
Steven Bishard
408 54thstreet
December 6, 2002 -rj�t t Z
Dear Planning Commission members
J live on Pinewood Dr at the Oceanfront and was very happy to see the
proposed amendment to the City Zoning Ordinance pertaining to the
dimensional requirement for nonconforming dots in the R-5S Residential
District This is an outstanding idea and is very necessar�at dus time I feel
that many builders are currently abusing this Ordinance and using loopholes
so they can squeeze in as many homes as they can into our single family
neighborhoods I've noticed that they are combining two conforming lots
together then subdividing them They will then create a nonconforming lot
and try to apply for a variance on the required setbacks I feel like they are
creating the hardship themselves and should not be granted any variance
request on these newly created lots The homes that are built on a 35-foat
nonconforming lot takes away from the rest of the homes on the street I# is
happening throughout the oceanfront and will continue unless this
amendment is passed
I'm sure the builders are not hapry about this but there are very few homes
left between Rudee Inlet and 17` St that are still zoned R-55 The builders
clam they are enhancing our neighborhood by building these tall skinny
houses In my opinion they are not They are creating smaller lot sizes,
taking out all the trees, changing the character of the neighborhood and
increasing traffic and people in these very quaint and quiet neighborhoods
which I feel decreases my property value The builders are very aware that
Shadowlawn, Panewood Park, and Lakewood are the last homes at the
oceanfront zoned R-5S It's quiet obvious that they are only out for the
almighty dollar I hope you vote in favor of this amendment to protect the
little bit of land and single-family homes left at the oceanfront
Thank you for hearing me out on this subject
Sincerely,
Sandra Neveu
5I5 Pinewood Dir
Virginia Beach, VA 23451
Wo
ON
Philip J Morgan Jr
yam- 1 Z 627 Delaware Ave
Vugvua Beach, Va , 23451
757-425-1084
5 December 2002
City of Vimma BeDepartment of Planialaor
=acnt Pfatg DIxIo
Mumcipal Center
BmIdmg 2 , Room 11
2405 Courthouse Drive
Virgirna Bah, &, -90
Dew Sir
This is wntGm in response to your 1Ctter 27 November 2002, pertaiatng to a change to the
Zoauag Orduiaace, as x+egards the Shadowlawn area or RSS residential d�strxct
Please find attached a previous letter stet to Mayon Oberndorf that states those facto:s
that should be considemd m rcndenng a dectsion in regards to the R55 distract
Sixteen years of outnght fraud m the deternnaatioII of lots that are adj aceat to our
property rn. the Shadowlswn area by the chief assessor cost those of as who held
adchtiorral property next to our dwclljngs a large soar of money aver those 16 yeazs No
one from any city office informed any of the cmze� who held such property that a
change had been wrought m the Zontng Requuemeats that rendered our property neither
sellable or buidablc Although those property owners who own a se lot 30 by SO feet
not adjacent to any property owned by them could and do sell and build on sad lots
The change to the Zonwg Oxdina=e was rendered to aceomodaLe thane of us who were is
the position of not besng able to sell or btuld on our IoLs The accamodahon requued u5
to add five (5) ft to the thuty (30) foot lots aad subdividc them from our homes, thus
creating a thirty five (35) foot lob. I think the present Zang for the RSS d�stnct should
rernmn as it is now We appreciate your unaesstanding in this matter
My wife and I are 80 yeaas and 71 years old respectively
I Incl
Ltr to Mayor Oberndorf pgs
P ip rgan� h f
The Morgan F y
627 Delaware Ave
a SchI VA, 1
October 2002
425-1084
Mayor Mcyera E Oixrndarf
2401 Courthouse I7nve
Cary Ha]], Hw]dtng #1
Mua►c=gsl Ccuttt
Vlta HVA, 23456
Dear Mayor Oberndorf
This left 15 wnttm vtb a heavy h ean The S bado wlawn Ci vi c Lcagv on average
20 max r b rs to attea ncz at a m twg W detcrmined that the decision rendered
1994 by unammous vote of the City Council, pertammg to sub-sundard lots Ln the R-5
zone, Ls mcorrect Thus is the s mecivic: league voted to correct the izju mee that
was apparent in the zonmg requu=ents at far tie Pe to sub -standard Tots and
the mixes that hid been c ll. ed on hose lots for approxituately 16 yean as though the r
w= bwldable gad sellable, wban m f d the zoning rcquiremew tnd cal d that the lots
were neitr Abe Councirs decision to reword the Zozang red ate -Lo Lam the
instoe, to b able to build on or sell the lots;, corrected tb-at situation
awlavm is not a Flamed developmw En fact it is i s very d v rsLfiaton that
rend m it it" harm and desimbihty Them are in Lhe netghborb od of 1400 homes un
h aw1aitm Lot s=s with homes vary from 2500 sq ft to 12 GOD s�q A Homes an the
lots vary from approxLmately 800 sq ft to 2500 sq ft HeLght vanes frcm SLngle story
trucmms to several thr= story strucn=
The comprormse reached in 1994 allowed the subdiwion of bwldlots ro uuclude
oWy one sub- -whard lot (I don't xst d the terrmmology sub -stance rn the case of
Shoclowlawn based on the one ply of the property, wba h was 20 ft * 5 ft and
& lots Tlas Ord depcndmg on the scronon of Shadowlawn in wbrh you punhased
lors )
The= are few dwidahlc lots, under the present zo code, left u3 Slmdowlawn
Cbmagmg the zo=g requ=ments agar would rec ate xi mjustce for thosc fever
homeo er that position. Some bane rners left m the position of having dividable
lots are in their senor years wd am using the abiLtv to d vide heir property -to att .n the
Tnaximum income possible from tbLesr homes wherx it comes time to sell., and move to a
Ps
eat cartmunity or less expensive wea when they can no lorigcT rn,, intam The Lr
residences Ask rwo endows who chd, Mf s lot Atwater and Mis Juawta
is e ely d cidt most possible to do, if the ground beneath your feet keeps
shifUng m value due to cha.a ng zc=g muirmcntand chat very gmund is yaLu
haqea lal asset to pro ds for you Lo y w old age
/I ; /
v v U
#12
We urge you to do the nght tag `I W is to make rio cban a and Ic va the zormng
req=emeaus as you correaly hided in 1994 Another consideration is the Lacrease m
tars both income real estate re i, ed under the present zommg t gmmments, when
the proper n sold d r o homes are built on the subdivided lots
SM
lvft I w*e
Page 1 of1
Ed Weeden - Proposed amendment to the City Zoning Ordinance
From <FlanJimDeb@aol com>
To <planadm@vbgov comma
Date 12/3/2002 6 55 PM
Subject Proposed amendment to the City Zoning Ordinance
CC <rsteflin@wans net>, <hggilEespieisi@juno com>
Dear sirs
This e-mail is in regard to a Planning Commission public hearing scheduled
for Wednesday, 'I'! December 2002 at noon on an ordnance to amend the city
zoning ordinance pertaining to dimensional requirements for nonconforming lots
in the R-5S residential district
Due to the time of the public hearing we will not be able to attend but would
like for our opinion to be heard through this e-mail
We are very much in support of the proposed amendment to eliminate the
ability of developers and others to build on substandard lots in the Shadowlawn
neighborhood This "loophole" in the zoning laws for Shadowlawn has caused
mayor damage to the neighborhood by encouraging tall, narrow, out -of -proportion
houses to be built next to single story homes It has also severely exacerbated
the already serious parking problem in Shadowlawn and has led to many
situations wherein emergency vehicles are unable to get to homes in the
neighborhood It has also led to adverse impact to the overall density of our
neighborhood and has eliminated much of the reason our neighborhood was
called "Shadowlawn" --- the trees When developers build on a 35 foot wide lot,
there is no room for landscaping or trees as the footprint of the house is virtually
the lot' I
We appeal to the members of the Planning Commission to note the large
number of Shadowlawn residents who have signed our petition to eliminate this
odious "nonconforming lot loophole" and to allow us to continue to maintain the
sense of our pleasant neighborhood before it is totally last
Thank you for your support
James and Deborah Flanagan
708 Arctic Avenue
Virginia Beach, VA 23451
file IIC 1WINNT1TeinplGW } 040d2 HTM 12l5/2002
Stephen White -Amendment to the city zoning R5S
From "Bruce Crowe" <bcdowe@erols com>
TO <planadm @ vbgov com>
Date 12/6/2002 4 30 PM
Subject Amendment to the city zoning R S
To Whom It May Concern
The Pinewood Park Civic League is defi eery i s in fu11 support of the Amen drnent pertaining to the change of
Dimentronal requiTern nts for nonconforming lots in the R SS Residential District Most of our members have or
plain to improve our houses and some of us already have done so Allowing builders to build on non conforming
lots, would just be detrimental to our neighborhood I myself bought this house in 1977 and have put more than
100 000 into it This neighborhood is one of the last on the Oceanfront with distinctive single homes Please
consider this ,n your decision Thanking you I remain,
Sincerely yours,
Bruce C Dowe President
Pinewood Park Civic League
file IIC 1WINNnTemp1GW}0OU10 HTM 12/612002
Page 1 of I
Ed Weeden - nin Ordinance Amen nt in R-5S �
=T=�� r-z, — -V r I W "a" —
.&M = 1z ?— 'A ~ 11..az'n � 4
From "ronandanji" <ronandanp@cox nets
To <planadm@vbgov com>
Date 12/5/2002 6 42 AM
Subject Zoning Ordinance Amendment in R-5S
CC "SCOTT Burdett" <oesunderl0@aol com>, "Megan Burns"
<richandmegan@earthlink net>
To Planning Commission
In response to the notification of a proposed amendment to the City Zoning Ordinance that will
be heard by the VA Beach Panning Commission on Wednesday, December 11 2002 at 12 00
noon
We request that the exception that allowed one substandard 35 foot lot when other
substandard lots were resubdivided in the - S Residential Zoning District be deleted and
that no substandard lots be allowed in the - S Residential Zoning District
Very Respectfully,
1r and Mrs Ronald W Farris
716 Delaware Ave
A Beach, VA 23451
ron ndar uO.net
file C W1NNT T p1G TIC I 5 002
From Jason Deans <JDeans a�mrdcpa comp
To Stephen White <planadm@vbgov corn?
Date 12/05/2002 9 52AM
Subject RE 11/27/02 City Zoning Ordinance proposed Amendment Notice R5S
Residential District
Based on review of the ordinance amendment I wish to go on record in sabring
that I as a property owner in Shadowlawn emphatically oppose the amendment
to the City Zoning Ordinance pertaining to dimensional requirements in R 5S
The 1994 amendments allowed for increased revitalization and positive demand
for homes in our neighborhood which has positively affected property values
in R 5S Restricting tricting the development in the neighborhood will make it no
longer economically feasible for deveiopers to build thus causing a
stagnancy in the neighborhood that will act to diminish home appreciation
and stunt positive progress as the neighborhood curb appeal is renewed b
the newer and fresher designs
Thank you
.Jason Deans
715 Goldsboro Aire
B VA 23451
Page I of 1
Ed Weeden = w S RESIDENTIAL 1 ING DISTRICT MEETING.
From Chris Bowen <chnslbowen@yahoo com> � �Z
To <planadm@vbgov com>
Date 12/11/2002 12 02 AM
Subject R-5S RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT MEETING
Planning Commission
My name is Christopher L Bowen I live at 421 Labe Drive in
Virginia Beach I was hoping to attend the Planning Commission
rneetsng on Wednesday the 11th (tosr wovi) but due to a work
conflict I will not be able
If I understand the purpose of the meeting correctly it is to
allaw the lots of nay neighborhood to be subdivided so that
more than 1 home can be built (up to 3 I believe) on what now
holds a single home I am apposed to this plan pause I
believe that it wdt set a precedent that will eventually get
out of control and tum our quaint little neighborhood into an
overcrowded community of cookie cutter homes The integrity
of the neighborhood will be ruined by allowing a developer to
come in and shrink the size of the lots to cram very tall narrow
homes (what some call a Charleston design) onto our narrow
streets I am in no way opposed to progress and I fully support
the remodeling and/or rebuilding of some of the homes in the
neighborhood (in fact my home could use a littlework) but by
teanng dawn 1 or 2 homes and replacing them with 3 or 4 is
completely unacceptable one of the reasons that I purchased a
home in this neighborhood was the lot size the homes sit on
very nice plots of land and all are set back From the streets
edge
Please don t let our nei 9 hborhood be ruined by the subdivision
of our land M I
Thank you I I I
Very RespectfuRy
ChnsMher L Bowen
Do you Yahao1
Yahoo' Mail Plus Powerful Affordable Sign up now
Nttp UmallolusyAhoo 90M
file cement % ax d%2OS ttin e den\Loeal%2OSetting \Te p\Go2 Y 11 0
LUTHER FINCHAM
1496 ARCTIC AVE
VIRGINIA BEACH VA 23451
TEL 57 4 2 8 - 8 5 6 2
December I I , 2002
City of Vuguua Bach
Department of Planung
Dear NU Karen ley
SLJ . C I ZONING CHANGE IN SHADOWLAWN AREA R5S
Thank you for the notificauon and infomiauon on the propomci changes in zany � Ln
the RSS District The planrnng depwttne�nt letter was my fist notice of the requested
cbenge Intomoaban ixom the civic leagues ne�►er seems to arnve on the east side of Lake
Holly A previous commitment to help a neighbor vnll prevent me from ng the
meeting on tins zonmg change
Since retunung to Yugtnm Reach four years ago and pumhasproperty at 15* and
Arctic Ave , I have often wandered why the criv is so involved in thus area Impwtt rtetns
have Encluded
Pis # one t o ad � ` ray house
Finding that my newly constivdcd home purchased w►th wndergrrnmd power utilities
also three ubhty poles anti one ground mounted transformer on a 50 by 100 foot lot
The c.fty seetus to canc,ei plans for street drainage, curbs and gutters, but needy an
easement on the rear of my lot to change my frontage on Lake Holly from water to swamp
by cavenng the lake in swamp giass
The city strongly supports increased noise levels from one neighbor above these listed
in the official maps released when we purchased the properties but does nethu'rg to
rninga#,e my losses of the cast of the cornmuniiy
Living here bas nat been cull, it often seems that the city sovemment hss my property
under attack. That saki, let me also say #lwt the planning department has always been
excellent about explatnuzg proposed changes The government does appeaQ to try to be
fwr to everyone
This bnngs us to the zowig change, it is clearly imposmble to purchase and demolish
all the property that would not conform to the new cads Also getting al! the owners of
1
12111102 09 28 F X N HAM -�- 17574274649
NO 027 90 �
— -- DcLar 11 2002
property that can be subdivided to agree to eve up that nght mnthout compensation is
very unlikely
If neither of the above can be accomplished then a charge in the zonuig will
winecesssnlg great some citizens unfairly to the benefit of othem for taus reason I request
#gat Sthe city consider net supporting any change u: the zonrng It is simply not fair at this
time
S=I,
l
l�
Luther Fincham
Page I of 1
Ed Weeden - RmSS Residential Zoning District - 440 Pinewood Drive
from <CMTAYLQRSR@aol com>
To <pianadm@vbgov com>
Date 12/11/2002 1 29 PM
Subject R-55 Residential Zoning District - 440 Pinewood Drive
Planning Corrrm ston
s I understand the letter you sent me the proposed amendment to the
City Zoning ordinance will delete the exception that allows smeller lots in
the Shadowla n neighborhood of the oceanfront If this is correct as a
property owner in that neighborhood I support the amendment, I strongly
feel the neighborhoods quiet character would be downgraded by more
structures on smaller lots I purchased property in this neighborhood
precisely for the environment including the smaller streets and old trees
Please accept this as my comment on the amendment and consider it in your
deliberations I had a short turnaround on the time allowed to learn about
the amendment and to get a response to your office so this was my best option
y name is Elizabeth M Taylor and my property is 440 Pinewood Dnve in
halo lavwrn Thank you for your consideration
file ocwment %2 nd%2OSenings e e d n\Local%2OSettings\Temp\CAW 2 12 12 20 2
K APPOINTMENTS
PERSONNEL BOARD
RESORT ADVISORY COMMISSION (RAQ
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
M NEW ' BUSINESS
ABSTRACT ACT CI EL CASES RESOLVED - November 2002
N ADJOURNMENT
CIVIL LAWSUITS RESOLVED DURING THE MONTH
OF DECEMBER, 2002
William P Bailel v Crry of Virginia Beach - FLSA
Adams Outdoor Advertising v Cite of Virginia Beach -Billboard Case
Lorraine M Pa ne v Cary ofVirg7nia Beach and S B Ballard Inc individually and
d bla S B Ballard Construction Company - Negligence
Maunce Bradley Smith v Officer E A Carrla - Civil Rights Case
David Plymel v City of Virginia Beach -Negligence
Robert Herman Properties L L C and Herman Inc v Michael Standing Oceanside
Condominium Association Inc Caton Family L L C C B M Company t/a Schooner
Motor Inn and Caty of Virginia Beach -Ownership of Property
Note Disposition details available on request from the City Attorney's Office