The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMAY 22, 2007 AGENDA CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH "COMMUNITY FOR A LIFETIME" CITY COUNCIL MAYOR M/:'Y/:'RA h'. OB/:'RNDOI?l': At-I.arge VIC/:' MAYOR LOUIS R. JON/:'S, Bayside - Dlslrict. WILUAM II. DeS11:PH, AI-I.arge HAIIIIY Ii. D1EZm., Kempsville - DistriG't 2 IWBHIITM. DYEII" Cen/erville - D/S/riG'tl BARBAIIA M. HENU:Y, I'rinG'es., Anne DistriG't 7 RHBA S. M<-( 'LANAN, Rose Hall - DistriG'1 3 JOHN Ii. UHRIN, BeaG'h Dislrlct 6 liON A. VIU.ANlII:'VA, At-Laf1!,e ROShMAIIY WW;ON, AI-Large JAMHS L. WOOD, I.ynnhaven -DistricI 5 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ('ITY MANAG/:'II - JAMHS K. SPOR/:' (DY ATIOIINI:Y - I./:'SUI: I.. UI.Lh'Y (O/1Y (V:RK - 1/lITH HOlXiHS FRAS/:'R, MMC 22 MAY 2007 CITY HALL BUILDING 2401 COURTHOUSE DRIVE VIRGINIA BEACH. VIRGINIA 23456-8005 PHONE:(757) 385-4303 FAX (757) 385-5669 E-MAIL: Ctycncl@vbgov.com 1. CITY COUNCIL BRIEFINGS - Conference Room - 3:30 PM A. VB 2007 FINAL REPORT Mac Rawls, Chairman B. EMPLOYEE BENEFITS REVIEW TASK FORCE Retiree Health Care Recommendations Robert Schleh, Chairman II. CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS III. REVIEW OF AGENDA IV. INFORMAL SESSION - Conference Room - 4:30 PM A. CALL TO ORDER - Mayor Meyera E. Obemdorf B. ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL C. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION V. FORMAL SESSION - Council Chamber - 6:00 PM A. CALL TO ORDER - Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf B. INVOCATION: Reverend Clarence McPherson Pastor, Agapae International Church C. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA D. ELECTRONIC ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL E. CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION F. MINUTES 1. INFORMAL and FORMAL SESSIONS May 15,2007 G. AGENDA FOR FORMAL SESSION H. PUBLIC HEARING 1. LEASE OF CITY-OWNED PROPERTY Rosemont Commerce Center at Sentara Way and A venue A 1. PUBLIC COMMENT 1. TEN- YEAR PLAN FOR HOMELESSNESS J. CONSENT AGENDA K. RESOLUTION/ORDINANCES 1. Resolution to AUTHORIZE the issuance of Public Facility Revenue Bonds not to exceed $100,354,000 and $4,025,000 Taxable Public Facility Bonds re a Plan of Financing with the Virginia Beach Development Authority. 2. Ordinance to AUTHORIZE the City Manager to execute a lease of City-owned property at Sentara Way and Avenue A with ROSE MONT INTERSTATE CENTER, L.L.c., to be used as an ingress and egress point and provide parking for the adjacent property. 3. Ordinance to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE $530,259 to the Clerk ofthe Circuit Court's FY 2006-07 Technology Trust Fund re the redaction of private information on public documents. L. PLANNING 1. Application of MARY K. AGRUSO for an enlargement of a nonconforming use at 103- B 57 'l'2 Street re the construction of a sunroom. DISTRICT 6 - BEACH RECOMMENDA nON APPROVAL 2. Application of HARRY R. PURKEY, JR., for the discontinuance. closure and abandonment of a portion of an unimproved alley at 736 Surfside Avenue re property line extension. DISTRICT 6 - BEACH REcOMMENDA nON APPROV AL --- 3. . Applications for extensions of time to satisfy conditions re the discontinuance. abandonment and closure at Jersey Avenue and Virginia Beach Boulevard re reservation for future development (approved by City Council on June 21, 2001, June 22, 2004, and May 23, 2006): DISTRICT 2 - KEMPSVILLE a. LOPE and MERCY PILE b. CORNELIUS F. and ANTONINA BOYNTON RECOMMENDATION APPROV AL 4. Variance to S5(b) of the Site Plan Ordinance that requires all newly created lots meet the requirements of the Floodplain Regulations for GLENN H. GETTlER, JR., at 493 Goodspeed Road re a master bedroom addition. AICUZ is less than 65 dB Ldn (Princess Anne Hills). DISTRICT 5 - L YNNHA VEN RECOMMENDATION APPROV AL 5. Variance to S4.4(d) ofthe Subdivision Ordinance that requires all newly created lots meet the requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance (CZO) for EDWARD A. and KATHLEEN T. KURPIEL at 2184 Princess Anne Road re the creation of a flag lot designed for a future single-family dwelling. DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE RECOMMENDATION DENIAL 6. Applications of VALUE PLACE REAL ESTATE SERVICES, LLC, at 1357 Diamond Springs Road DISTRICT 4 - BA YSIDE a. Modification of Proffers to allow a change of use from an office/warehouse facility to the development of a hotel (Conditional Change of Zoning approved on February 28, 2006) b. Conditional Use Permit: 121-unit limited service hotel DEFERRED RECOMMENDA nON March 13,2007 and March 27,2007 APPROV AL 7. Application of SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION, L.L.C., for a Change of Zoning District Classification from R-5D and R-I0 Residential Districts to Conditional A-36 Apartment District, Conditional B-4 Mixed Use District and Conditional A-12 Apartment District with a PD-H2 Overlay at South Independence Boulevard, Princess Anne Road and 1632 Salem Road, "Spence Farm," re 103 single-family dwellings, 347 townhomes, and 230 twin townhomes and Senior Housing. DISTRICT 1 - CENTERVILLE and DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE REcOMMENDA nON DEFERRAL 8. Applications of CONNIE ONE, L.L.c., re thirteen (13) buildings with four (4) units each at Connie Lane, Connie Way and Baker Road: DISTRICT 4 - BA YSIDE and DISTRICT 2 - KEMPSVILLE a. Discontinuance. closure and abandonment of an unimproved portion of Connie Lane to incorporate the land into the adjoining parcels b. Change of Zoning District Classification from R-7.5 Residential District and I-I Light Industrial District to Conditional A-12 Apartment District REcOMMENDA nON APPROV AL M. APPOINTMENTS OPEN SPACE ADVISORY COMMITTEE N. UNFINISHED BUSINESS O. NEW BUSINESS P. ADJOURNMENT CITYWIDE TOWN MEETINGS June 19 Virginia Beach Convention Center -7:15 pm Shaping our Community and Ourselves to Protect our Waterways September 18 Time and Location to be Announced FY 2008-2010 Budget November 20 Green Run Homeowners Association Building - 7:15 pm SwrmwarerPfunsandFunmng ********* If you are physically disabled or visually impaired and need assistance at this meeting, please call the CITY CLERK'S OFFICE at 385-4303 Hearing impaired, call: Virginia Relay Center at 1-800-828-1120 *********** Agenda 0511712007mb www.vbgov.com 1. CITY COUNCIL BRIEFINGS - Conference Room - 3:30 PM A. VB 2007 FINAL REPORT Mac Rawls, Chairman B. EMPLOYEE BENEFITS REVIEW TASK FORCE Retiree Health Care Recommendations Robert Schleh, Chairman 11. CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS III. REVIEW OF AGENDA IV. INFORMAL SESSION - Conference Room- A. CALL TO ORDER - Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf 4:30 PM B. ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL C. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION V. FORMAL SESSION - Council Chamber - 6:00 PM A. CALL TO ORDER - Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf B. INVOCATION: Reverend Clarence McPherson Pastor, Agapae International Church C. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA D. ELECTRONIC ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL E. CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION F. MINUTES 1. INFORMAL and FORMAL SESSIONS May 15,2007 G. AGEN.DA FOR FORMAL SESSION .rsulutinu CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION VIRGINIA BEACH CITY COUNCIL WHEREAS: The Virginia Beach City Council convened into CLOSED SESSION, pursuant to the affirmative 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 Virginia requires a certification by the governing body that such Closed Session was conducted in conformity with Virginia Law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the Virginia Beach City Council hereby certifies that, to the best of each member's knowledge, (a) only 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 HEARING 1. LEASE OF CITY-OWNED PROPERTY Rosemont Commerce Center at Sentara Way and A venue A 1. PUBLIC COMMENT 1. TEN-YEAR PLAN FOR HOMELESSNESS PUBLIC HEARING LEASE OF CITY PROPERTY The Virginia Beach City Council will hold a PUBLIC HEARING on the proposed leasing of City-owned property on Tuesday May 22. 2007 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber of the City Hall Building (Build- ing #1) at the Virginia Beach Municipal Center. Vir- ginia Beach, Virginia. The purpose of this Hearing will be to obtain public comment on the City's pro- posal to lease the following property: Approximately 0.15 acres of land used for egress to and from Rosemont Commerce Center. If you are physically disabled or visually impaired and need assistance at this meeting, please call the CITY CLERK'S OFFICE at 385-4303. Any questions concerning this matter should be directed to the Department of Management Ser- vices - Facilities Management Office, Room 228. Building 18. at the Virginia Beach Municipal Center. The Facilities Management Office telephone number is (757)385 8234. /2 .- , C:rz::~-~'~'-" / Ruth Hodges Fraser. MMC City Clerk Beacon May 13, 2007 16989234 J. CONSENT AGENDA K. RESOLUTION/ORDINANCES 1. Resolution to AUTHORIZE the issuance of Public Facility Revenue Bonds not to exceed $100,354,000 and $4,025,000 Taxable Public Facility Bonds re a Plan of Financing with the Virginia Beach Development Authority. 2. Ordinance to AUTHORIZE the City Manager to execute a lease of City-owned property at Sentara Way and Avenue A with ROSEMONT INTERSTATE CENTER, L.L.C., to be used as an ingress and egress point and provide parking for the adjacent property. 3. Ordinance to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE $530,259 to the Clerk ofthe Circuit Court's FY 2006-07 Technology Trust Fund re the redaction of private information on public documents. ~~ ~'~I~' . "'~' 0:.:. -~~) (of '. .. ~~~ ~'\- ,.) {;"....;- III ",-,,;~.J' ~ CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: $100,345,000 City of Virginia Beach Development Authority Public Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 2007 A and $4,025,000 Taxable Public Facility Revenue Bond, Series 20078 MEETING DATE: May 22,2007 . Background: On two previous occasions City Council has undertaken, in connection with the Virginia Beach Development Authority, the issuance of Public Facility Revenue Bonds ("PFRBs") to finance various public improvement projects including the convention center, several garages at the Town Center, garages at the oceanfront, and open space acquisition. In August 2003, the Development Authority authorized the issuance of $165 million in PFRBs, followed by a second series of bonds in May 2005 for $100 million. On May 15, 2007, the Development Authority approved a third series of PFRBs in the amount of $104,370,000. This third series of bonds will complete activity for the Town Center through Phase III, provide for the Sandler Center for the Performing Arts, complete funding for the convention center, and provide funding for certain General Fund projects. A complete list of projects to be financed with the 2007 Bonds is attached as Exhibit A. . Considerations: Hunton & Williams, the City's bond counsel, has prepared a Resolution for Council consideration approving the Plan of Financing between the Authority and City Council. The Third Supplemental Agreement of Trust authorizes the 2007 Bonds in detail and form and the Second Supplemental Support Agreement between the Authority and the City outlines the City's annual payments in amounts sufficient to pay debt service on all series of PFRBs. The 2007 Bonds will be sold by competitive bid on June 13, 2007, and on such terms as shall be satisfactory to the City Manager, provided that the Series 2007 A bonds shall have a true interest cost not to exceed 6.5% and the 2007B Taxable Bonds shall have a true interest cost not to exceed 7.25%. The actions of the City Manager shall be conclusive and no further action shall be necessary on the part of City Council. The final terms of the bond sale will be provided to City Council. This third series of bonds will complete the PFRB program as outlined to date. . Public Information: Public information will be handled through the normal Council agenda process. The bond authorization was part of the public information process of the CIP. In addition, the Resolution authorizes the distribution of the Preliminary Official Statement for marketing purposes. Also a Notice of Sale will be placed in The Bond Buver. . Alternatives: There are no alternative funding sources at this time. This request follows previously approved CIPs and Development Agreements on the Town Center. . Recommendations: The enclosed Resolution approving a plan of Financing with VBDA and authorizing the execution of various financing documents associated with the Plan is recommended for approval by City Council. . Attachments: Project Description (Exhibit A) Resolution Draft of Third Supplemental Irust Agreement Draft of Second Supplemental Support Agreement Draft of Preliminary Official Statement (including Disclosure Agreement) Recommended Action: Approval of Resolution Submitting DeparbnentJAgency: Finance Q ~ Q ~ City Manager:~) K. ~~ RESOLUTION APPROVING A PLAN OF FINANCING WITH THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, APPROVING CERTAIN DOCUMENTS PREPARED IN CONNECTION WITH SUCH FINANCING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF THE SAME WHEREAS, the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia (the "City"), desires to undertake, in connection with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority (the "Authority"), the financing of various public facilities from time to time, including, the replacement of the Convention Center, the construction of The Sandler Center for the Performing Arts, a pedestrian bridge and the Block 7 Conference Center, Open Space Site acquisition, the construction of the Town Center Block 7 and 10 garages, and the acquisition of a Revenue Assessment and Collection System, a City/School Human Resources Payroll System and an Automatic Vehicle Locator System (collectively, the "2007 Projects"); and WHEREAS, the Authority, pursuant to Chapter 643 of the Virginia Acts of Assembly of 1964, as amended (the "Act"), under which it is created, is authorized to acquire, improve, maintain, equip, own, lease and dispose of "Authority facilities," as defmed in the Act, to fmance or refinance such facilities, to issue its revenue bonds, notes and other obligations from time to time for such purposes and to pledge all or any part of its assets, whether then owned or thereafter acquired, as security for the payment of the principal of and interest on any such obligations; and WHEREAS, in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, the City requests the Authority to undertake the 2007 Projects for the benefit of the City and to issue its Public Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 2007 A(the "Series 2007 A Bonds"), and its Taxable Public Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 2007B (the "Series 2007B Bonds" and, together with the Series 2007A Bonds, the "Bonds"), in the maximum aggregate principal amount not to exceed $104,370,000 to finance costs incurred or to be incurred in connection with the 2007 Projects and the costs of issuing the Bonds; and WHEREAS, there have been presented to this meeting drafts of the following documents (the "Documents"), proposed in connection with the undertaking of the 2007 Projects and the issuance and sale of the Bonds: (a) Third Supplemental Agreement of Trust draft dated May 9, 2007 (the "Third Supplemental Agreement"), supplementing the Agreement of Trust dated as of September 1, 2003, as previously supplemented, including the form the Bonds (collectively, the "Trust Agreement"), all between the Authority and U.S. Bank National Association (successor to Wachovia Bank, National Association), as successor trustee (the "Trustee"), pursuant to which the Bonds are to be issued and which is to be acknowledged and consented to by the City; (b) Second Supplemental Support Agreement draft dated May 9, 2007, supplementing and amending the Support Agreement dated as of September 1, 2003, as previously supplemented and amended (the "Support Agreement"), all between the Authority and the City pursuant to which the City will make annual payments to the Authority in amounts sufficient to pay the principal of and interest on the Bonds; (c) Preliminary Official Statement draft dated May 9, 2007, of the Authority relating to the public offering of the Bonds (the "Preliminary Official Statement"); and (d) Continuing Disclosure Agreement draft May 9, 2007, pursuant to which the City agrees to undertake certain continuing disclosure obligations with respect to the Bonds; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 1. The following plan for financing the 2007 Projects is hereby approved. The Authority will issue the Bonds in a maximum aggregate principal amount not to exceed $104,370,000. The Authority will use the proceeds of the Bonds to fmance the costs of the 2007 Projects and the costs of issuing the Bonds. Pursuant to the Support Agreement, the City will make Annual Payments and Additional Payments (as each is defined in the Support Agreement) to the Authority in amounts sufficient to amortize the Bonds and to pay the fees or expenses of the Authority and the Trustee. The obligation of the Authority to pay principal of and premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds will be limited to annual payments and additional payments received from the City. The Bonds will be secured by an assignment of the Annual Payments and certain Additional Payments due under the Support Agreement, all for the benefit of the holders of the Bonds. The undertaking by the City to make Annual Payments and Additional Payments will be subject to the City Council making annual appropriations in amounts sufficient for such purposes. The plan of financing for the 2007 Projects shall contain such additional requirements and provisions as may be approved by the City. 2. The City Council, while recognizing that it is not empowered to make any binding commitment to make appropriations beyond the current fiscal year, hereby states its intent to make annual appropriations in future fiscal years in amounts sufficient to make all payments due under the Support Agreement and hereby recommends that future City Councils do likewise during the term of the Support Agreement. 3. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute the Documents (except for the Preliminary Official Statement), which shall be in substantially the forms submitted to this meeting, which are hereby approved, with such completions, omissions, insertions and changes not inconsistent with this Resolution as may be approved by the City Manager, his execution to constitute conclusive evidence of his approval of any such completions, omissions, insertions and changes. 4. (a) In making completions to the Support Agreement, the City Manager, in collaboration with Government Finance Associates, Inc. and ARD Government Finance Group, the City's fmancial advisors (the "Financial Advisors"), shall provide for Annual Payments in amounts equivalent to the payments on the Series 2007 A Bonds and the Series 2007B Bonds, which shall be sold to the purchaser thereof on terms as shall be satisfactory to the City Manager; provided that the Annual Payments shall be equivalent to (i) the Series 2007 A Bonds maturing in 2 installments ending not later than in 2027; having a true or "Canadian" interest cost not exceeding 6.50% (taking into account any original issue discount); and being sold to the purchaser thereof at a price not less than 99% of the aggregate principal amount thereof (without taking into account any original issue discount or premium) and (ii) the Series 2007B Bonds maturing in installments ending not later than in 2027; having a true or "Canadian" interest cost not exceeding 7.25% (taking into account any original issue discount); and being sold to the purchaser thereof at a price not less than 99% of the aggregate principal amount thereof (without taking into account any original issue discount or premium). The City Manager is also authorized to approve the principal amount of the Series 2007 A Bonds, which shall be the tax- exempt portion of the Bonds, and the principal amount of the Series 2007B Bonds, which shall be the taxable portion of the Bonds as the City Manager shall determine to be in the best interest of the City. The City Manager is further authorized to approve the maturity schedules, including serial maturities and term maturities, for each of the Series 2007 A Bonds and Series 2007B Bonds as the City Manager shall determine to be in the best interest of the City. (b) The Bonds shall be sold by competitive bid in the principal amount determined by the City Manager, in collaboration with the Financial Advisors, and the City Manager shall receive bids for the Bonds and award the Bonds to the bidder providing the lowest "true" or "Canadian" interest cost, subject to the limitations set forth in the paragraph above. Following the sale of the Series 2007 A Bonds and the Series 2007B Bonds, the City Manager shall file a certificate with the City Clerk setting forth the final terms of the Series 2007 A Bonds and the Series 2007B Bonds. The actions of the City Manager in approving the terms of the Series 2007 A Bonds and the Series 2007B Bonds shall be conclusive, and no further action shall be necessary on the part of the City Council. 5. The Preliminary Official Statement in the form presented to this meeting is approved with respect to the information contained therein pertaining to the City. The purchaser or purchasers of the Bonds is authorized to distribute to prospective purchasers of the Bonds the Preliminary Official Statement in form deemed to be "near fmal," within the meaning of Rule 15c2-12 of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Rule"), with such completions, omissions, insertions and changes not inconsistent with this Resolution as may be approved by the City Manager. Such distribution shall constitute conclusive evidence that the City has deemed the Preliminary Official Statement to be final as of its date within the meaning of the Rule, with respect to the information therein pertaining to the City. The City Manager is authorized and directed to approve such completions, omissions, insertions and other changes to the Preliminary Official Statement that are necessary to reflect the terms of the sale of the Bonds, determined as set forth in paragraph 4, and the details thereof and that are appropriate to complete it as an official statement in fmal form (the "Official Statement") and distribution thereof by the purchaser or purchasers of the Bonds shall constitute conclusive evidence that the City has deemed the Official Statement fmal as of its date within the meaning of the Rule. 6. The City covenants that it shall not take or omit to take any action the taking or omission of which shall cause the Series 2007 A Bonds to be "arbitrage bonds" within the meaning of Section 148 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"), and regulations thereunder, or otherwise cause interest on the Series 2007 A Bonds to be includable in the gross income for Federal income tax purposes of the registered owners thereof under existing law. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the City shall comply with any provision 3 of law that may require the City at any time to rebate to the United States of America any part of the earnings derived from the investment of the gross proceeds of the Series 2007 A Bonds. The City shall pay from its legally available general funds any amount required to be rebated to the United States of America pursuant to the Code. 7. Any authorization herein to execute a document shall include authorization to deliver it to the other parties thereto and to record such document where appropriate. 8. All other acts of the City Manager, the Director of Finance and other officers of the City that are in conformity with the purposes and intent of this Resolution and in furtherance of the issuance and sale of the Bonds and the undertaking of the 2007 Projects are hereby approved and ratified. 9. This Resolution shall take effect immediately. 4 EXHIBIT A DESCRIPTION OF SERIES 2007 PROJECTS The following sets forth brief descriptions of the Series 2007 Projects to be financed in whole or in part with the proceeds of the Series 2007 Bonds: Convention Center Replacement - This project provides for the replacement and relocation of the existing pavilion convention center on the same site. It will provide for approximately 150,000 square feet of exhibit hall, 25,000 square feet of meeting rooms and 32,000 square feet of ballroom space. The cost of this project is approximately $206,844,513. The Sandler Center for the Performing Arts - This project provides for the replacement and demolition of the former Pavilion Theatre, and the acquisition of land at the Town Center development for the new performing arts center. The cost of this project is approximately $46,700,000. Town Center Garage Block 10 - This project is for the construction of an approximate 851 space parking garage located in the Town Center district of the City. The cost of this project is approximately $14,145,245. Town Center Garage Block 7 - This project is for the construction of an approximate 947 space parking garage located in the Town Center district of the City, of which 735 parking spaces will be used by the City. The cost of this project is approximately $17,751,060. Block 7 Conference Center - This project is for the construction of a conference center on Town Center Block 7. The conference center will be approximately 24,000 square feet, which includes a 9,000 square foot ballroom. Total estimated cost of this project is approximately $8,645,604. Pedestrian Bridge - This project is for the construction of a pedestrian bridge to connect the public parking garage located on Town Center Block 12 to the public parking garage located on Town Center Block 7 and will span across Columbus Street. The bridge is 130 feet long and 10 feet wide. Total estimated cost of this project is approximately $1,805,000. Open Space Site Acquisition - This project provides for the acquisition of land for preservation and/or recreational purposes. Acquisition may include areas to remain in a natural state, land to be improved as parks and active recreation facilities, land to preserve flood plains and/or act as storm water management facilities and land to use for right-of-way to improve as trails. The cost of this project is approximately $49,494,757. Revenue Assessment and Collection System - This project provides for a comprehensive, fully integrated tax system to replace the computer systems currently used to support tax revenue assessment and collection. The cost of this project is approximately $11,480,900. City/School Human Resources Payroll System - This project replaces the City's ten year old payroll system with a new information system utilizing current network infrastructure. The cost of this project is approximately $9,648,061. Automatic Vehicle Locator System - This project will provide for hardware and software to be installed in the Emergency Communications Center and a GPS device to be installed in each first responder's public safety vehicle, which will report the vehicle's location to the Emergency Communications Center. The cost of this project is approximately $1,313,500. SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL SUPPORT AGREEMENT between CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY and CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA Dated as of June 1, 2007 NOTE: TIDS SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL SUPPORT AGREEMENT HAS BEEN ASSIGNED TO, AND IS SUBJECT TO A SECURITY INTEREST IN FAVOR OF, U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE UNDER AN AGREEMENT OF TRUST DATED AS OF SEPTEMBER 1, 2003, AS SUPPLEMENTED BY A FIRST SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT OF TRUST DATED AS OF SEPTEMBER 1, 2003, A SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT OF TRUST DATED AS OF MAY 1, 2005, AND A THIRD SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT OF TRUST DATED AS OF JUNE 1,2007, WITH THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, AS AMENDED OR SUPPLEMENTED FROM TIME TO TIME. INFORMATION CONCERNING SUCH SECURITY INTEREST MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE TRUSTEE AT RICHMOND, VIRGINIA. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Parties............................ ....... ........... ..... ............ .................... ............... .............. .... ................ ....... ....1 Recitals...... ........... .... ... ... ..... ............. ............ ..... .................................... ......... ....... ............... ... .........1 Granting Clauses................ ............................................. ..................... ..................... .......................1 ARTICLE I DEFINITIONS AND RULES OF CONSTRUCTION Section 1.1 Defu1itions..... ................. .................. .................................. ........... .................... ...........2 Section 1.2 Rules of Construction. ............... ................... ........................................ .......................3 ARTICLE n REPRESENTATIONS Section 2.1 Representations by Authority. ............. ............... .................................. ........ ..... ..........3 Section 2.2 Representations by City. .......... ............................ ..................... ...................................4 ARTICLE In AGREEMENT TO ISSUE BONDS Section 3.1 Agreement to Issue Series 2007 Bonds. ......................................................................5 ARTICLE IV PAYMENT OBLIGATIONS; MASTER SUPPORT AGREEMENT AMENDMENTS Section 4.1 Amounts Payable. ........................................................................................................5 ARTICLE V PREPAYMENT AND REDEMPTION Section 5.1 Prepayment and Redemption. ......................................................................................5 ARTICLE VI SERIES 2007 ARBITRAGE REBATE FUND Section 6.1 Series 2007 Arbitrage Rebate Fund. ............................................................................6 Section 6.2 Rebate Requirement................... ................................................... ................. ........... ...6 Section 6.3 Calculation and Report of Rebate Amount. .................................................................6 Section 6.4 Payment of Rebate Amount. ........................................................................................7 Section 6.5 Reports by Trustee. ....................................................................... ............................... 7 Section 6.6 Disposition of Balance in Series 2007 Arbitrage Rebate Fund. ..................................7 (i) ARTICLE VII MISCELLANEOUS Section 7.1 Private Activity Covenants. .........................................................................................8 Section 7 .2 Severability... ..... ...................... ..................... .......... .... ........... ...................... .... ........ ....8 Section 7.3 Successors and Assigns............ ..................... ........... .............. ......... ............ .................8 Section 7.4 Counterparts............................. .......... ................................... ....................... ................ 8 Section 7.5 Governing Law. ....................... .................. ................ ............ ...... .................... ....... ..... 8 Signatures.. ............. ... ............. ........ .............. ............... .......... ........... ... ......... .... ................ .... .......... ..9 Receipt............ .................. ............................................................................... ............... ..... ..........10 Exhibit A - Schedule of Payments .............................................................................................. A-I Exhibit B - Description of Series 2007 Projects ..........................................................................B-l (ii) THIS SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL SUPPORT AGREEMENT dated as of June 1, 2007, by and between the CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia (the "Authority"), and the CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA, a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia (the "City"), provides: w ! T N E .s. .s. E T H: WHEREAS, the Authority is a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia duly created by Chapter 643 of the Virginia Acts of Assembly of 1964, as amended (the "Act"); and WHEREAS, the Act authorities the Authority to acquire, improve, maintain, equip, own, lease and dispose of "Authority facilities," as defined in the Act, to finance or refmance and lease facilities for use by, among others, a city, to issue its revenue bonds, notes and other obligations from time to time for such purposes and to pledge all or any part of its assets, whether then owned or thereafter acquired, as security for the payment of the principal of and interest on any such obligations; and WHEREAS, the City desires to undertake a program of financing or refinancing the acquisition, construction and equipping of various public facilities that the City determines to undertake from time to time; and WHEREAS, in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, the City has requested the Authority to undertake one or more series of Projects (as defined in the Support Agreement, as hereinafter defmed), and the Authority has determined to issue from time to time pursuant to the terms of an Agreement of Trust dated as of September 1, 2003 (the "Master Agreement of Trust"), between the Authority and U.S. Bank National Association (successor to Wachovia Bank, National Association), Richmond, Virginia, as successor trustee (the "Trustee"), as supplemented by a First Supplemental Agreement of Trust dated as of September 1, 2003, a Second Supplemental Agreement of Trust dated as of May 1, 2005, and a Third Supplemental Agreement of Trust dated as of June 1, 2007, all between the Authority and the Trustee (collectively, the "Agreement of Trust"), its public facility revenue bonds and to loan the proceeds thereof to the City to finance or refinance costs incurred in connection with such Projects and costs of issuing such bonds; and WHEREAS, in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, the Authority and the City have entered into a Support Agreement dated as of September 1,2003, as supplemented and amended by a First Supplemental Support Agreement dated as of May 1, 2005 (the "Master Support Agreement"), pursuant to which the Authority has agreed to loan from time to time such proceeds to the City, and the City has agreed to repay such loans, subject to appropriation by the City Council from time to time of sufficient moneys for such purpose; and WHEREAS, within the limitations and in compliance with the Agreement of Trust, the City has requested the Authority to issue two series of Bonds in the aggregate principal amount of$ (the "Series 2007 Bonds") and to loan such proceeds to the City to finance the costs of the Series 2007 Projects (as hereinafter defined) pursuant to the terms of this Second Supplemental Support Agreement; and WHEREAS, all acts, conditions and things required by law to happen, exist and be performed precedent to and in connection with the execution of and entering into this Second Supplemental Support Agreement have happened, exist and have been performed in regular and due time and in form and manner as required by law, and the parties hereto are now duly empowered to execute and enter into this Second Supplemental Support Agreement; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements hereinafter contained and other valuable consideration, the parties hereto covenant and agree as follows: ARTICLE I DEFINITIONS AND RULES OF CONSTRUCTION Section 1.1 Defmitions. Unless otherwise defmed in this Second Supplemental Support Agreement, all words used herein shall have the meanings assigned to such terms in the Agreement of Trust or the Master Support Agreement. The following words as used in this Second Supplemental Support Agreement shall have the following meanings unless a different meaning clearly appears from the context: "Agreement of Trust" shall mean the Agreement of Trust dated as of September 1, 2003, as previously supplemented, and as further supplemented by the Third Supplemental Agreement of Trust. "Basic Agreements" shall mean the Agreement of Trust and the Support Agreement. "First Supplemental Support Agreement" shall mean the First Supplemental Support Agreement dated as of May 1,2005, between the Authority and the City, which supplements the Master Support Agreement. "Master Support Agreement" shall mean the Support Agreement dated as of September 1,2003, between the Authority and the City. "Second Supplemental Support Agreement" shall mean this Second Supplemental Support Agreement dated as of June 1, 2007, between the Authority and the City, which supplements the Master Support Agreement. "Series 2007 Bonds" shall mean the Series 2007 A Bonds and the Series 2007B Bonds. "Series 2007 Projects" shall mean the financing of the acquisition, construction and equipping of all or a portion of the projects as set forth on Exhibit B. "Series 2007 A Arbitrage Rebate Fund" shall mean the fund established in Section 6.1. 2 "Series 2007A Bonds" shall mean the Authority's $ Public Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 2007 A, authorized to be issued pursuant to the Third Supplemental Agreement of Trust. "Series 2007B Bonds" shall mean the Authority's $ Taxable Public Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 2007B, authorized to be issued pursuant to the Third Supplemental Agreement of Trust. "Support Agreement" shall mean the Master Support Agreement as previously supplemented and amended and as supplemented and amended by this Second Supplemental Support Agreement. "Third Supplemental Agreement of Trust" shall mean the Third Supplemental Agreement of Trust dated as of June 1, 2007, between the Authority and the Trustee, which supplements the Agreement of Trust. Section 1.2 Rules of Construction. The following rules shall apply to the construction of this Second Supplemental Support Agreement unless the context otherwise requires: (a) Words importing the singular number shall include the plural number and vice versa. (b) Words importing the redemption or calling for redemption of Bonds shall not be deemed to refer to or connote the payment of Bonds at their stated maturity. (c) Unless otherwise indicated, all references herein to particular Articles or Sections are references to Articles or Sections of this Second Supplemental Support Agreement. (d) The headings herein and Table of Contents to this Second Supplemental Support Agreement herein are solely for convenience of reference and shall not constitute a part of this Second Supplemental Support Agreement nor shall they affect its meaning, construction or effect. (e) All references herein to payment of Bonds are references to payment of principal of and premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds. ARTICLE II REPRESENTATIONS Section 2.1 Representations by Authority. The Authority makes the following representations: (a) The Authority is a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia duly created under the Act; 3 (b) Pursuant to the Act, the Authority has full power and authority to enter into the Basic Agreements and to perform the transactions contemplated thereby and to carry out its obligations thereunder and by proper action has du1y authorized, executed and delivered the Basic Agreements. (c) The execution, delivery and compliance by the Authority with the terms and conditions of the Basic Agreements will not conflict with or constitute or resu1t in a defau1t under or violation of, (1) any existing law, rule or regulation applicable to the Authority, or (2) any trust agreement, mortgage, deed of trust, lien, lease, contract, note, order, judgment, decree or other agreement, instrument or other restriction of any kind to which the Authority or any of its assets is subject; (d) No further approval, consent or withholding of objection on the part of any regulatory body or any official, Federal, state or local, is required in connection with the execution or delivery of or compliance by the Authority with the terms and conditions of the Basic Agreements, except that no representation is made as to the applicability of any Federal or state securities laws; and (e) There is no litigation at law or in equity or any proceeding before any governmental agency involving the Authority pending or, to the knowledge of the Authority, threatened with respect to (1) the creation and existence of the Authority, (2) its authority to execute and deliver the Basic Agreements, (3) the validity or enforceability of the Basic Agreements, or the Authority's performance of its obligations thereunder, (4) the title of any officer of the Authority executing the Basic Agreements, or (5) the ability of the Authority to issue and sell its bonds. Section 2.2 Representations by City. The City makes the following representations: (a) The City is a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia; (b) The City has full power and authority to enter into the Basic Agreements to which it is a party and to perform the transactions contemplated thereby and to carry out its obligations thereunder and by proper action has du1y authorized, executed and delivered the Basic Agreements; (c) The City is not in defau1t in the payment of the principal of or interest on any of its indebtedness for borrowed money and is not in defau1t under any instrument under or subject to which any indebtedness for borrowed money has been incurred, and no event has occurred and is continuing that with the lapse of time or the giving of notice, or both, wou1d constitute or resu1t in an event of defau1t thereunder; (d) The City is not in defau1t under or in violation of, and the execution, delivery and compliance by the City with the terms and conditions of the Basic Agreements to which it is a party will not conflict with or constitute or result in a default under or violation of, (1) any existing law, rule or regulation applicable to the City or (2) any trust agreement, mortgage, deed of trust, lien, lease, contract, note, order, judgment, decree or other agreement, instrument or 4 restriction of any kind to which the City or any of its assets is subject, and no event has occurred and is continuing that with the lapse of time or the giving of notice, or both, would constitute or result in such a default or violation; (e) No further approval, consent or withholding of objection on the part of any regulatory body or any official, Federal, state or local, is required in connection with the execution or delivery of or compliance by the City with the terms and conditions of the Basic Agreements to which it is a party; and (f) There is no litigation at law or in equity or any proceeding before any governmental agency involving the City pending or, to the knowledge of the City, threatened with respect to (1) the authority of the City to execute and deliver the Basic Agreements to which it is a party, (2) the validity or enforceability of the Basic Agreements or the City's performance of its obligations thereunder, (3) the title of any officer of the City executing the Basic Agreements, or (4) the ability of the City to undertake the Series 2007 Projects. ARTICLE In AGREEMENT TO ISSUE BONDS Section 3.1 Agreement to Issue Series 2007 Bonds. The Authority shall contemporaneously with the execution and delivery hereof proceed with the issuance and sale of the Series 2007 Bonds bearing interest, maturing and having the other terms and provisions set forth in the Agreement of Trust. ARTICLE IV PAYMENT OBLIGATIONS; MASTER SUPPORT AGREEMENT AMENDMENTS Section 4.1 Amounts Payable. The Master Support Agreement is hereby amended to replace in its entirety the Exhibit A attached thereto with the new Exhibit A attached hereto. Pursuant to Article IV of the Master Support Agreement and subject specifically to the limitation of Section 4.4 thereof, the City shall pay to the Authority or its assignee the Annual Payments specified in Exhibit A attached hereto on or before the due dates set forth in such exhibit. The Annual Payments shall be payable without notice or demand at the designated corporate trust office of the Trustee. ARTICLE V PREPAYMENT AND REDEMPTION Section 5.1 Prepayment and Redemption. The City shall have the option to prepay any Annual Payment at the times and in the amounts as necessary to exercise its option to cause the Series 2007 Bonds to be redeemed as set 5 forth in such Series 2007 Bonds. Such prepayments of Annual Payments shall be made at the times and in the amounts as necessary to accomplish the optional redemption of the Series 2007 Bonds as set forth in the Series 2007 Bonds. The Series 2007 Bonds shall be prepaid or redeemed in the manner and at the times set forth in the Series 2007 Bonds. Upon the exercise of such option, the City shall also pay as Additional Payments, the amounts necessary to pay the premium, if any, due on such Series 2007 Bonds on the date or dates of their redemption. The City shall give the Trustee notice of any redemption of such Series 2007 Bonds at least 15 days prior to the latest date that notice of redemption may be given pursuant to Section 402 of the Master Agreement of Trust. Such notice to the Trustee shall specify the redemption date, the principal amount of Series 2007 Bonds to be redeemed, the premium, if any, and the section of the Agreement of Trust pursuant to which such redemption is to be made. ARTICLE VI SERIES 2007 A ARBITRAGE REBATE FUND Section 6.1 Series 2007 A Arbitrage Rebate Fund. There is hereby established the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, Series 2007 A Public Facility Revenue Bond Arbitrage Rebate Fund (the "Series 2007A Arbitrage Rebate Fund") to be held by or on behalf of the City. Subject to the limitation in Section 4.4 of the Master Support Agreement, the City shall deposit moneys in the Series 2007 A Arbitrage Rebate Fund from time to time for payment of the rebate obligations under the Code (the "Rebate Amount"). The City may establish separate accounts in the Series 2007 A Arbitrage Rebate Fund for such payments. Section 6.2 Rebate Requirement. Except with respect to earnings on funds and accounts qualifying for exceptions to the rebate requirement of Section 148 of the Code, the City shall pay, but solely from amounts in the Series 2007AArbitrage Rebate Fund, the Rebate Amount to the United States of America, as and when due, in accordance with Section 148(f) of the Code, as provided in this Article, and shall retain records of all such determinations until six years after payment of the Series 2007 A Bonds. Section 6.3 Calculation and Report of Rebate Amount. (a) The City selects July 15 as the end of the bond year with respect to the Series 2007 A Bonds pursuant to Treasury Regulation Section 1.148-1. (b) Within 30 days after the initial installment computation date which is the last day of the fifth bond year, unless such date is changed by the City prior to the date that any amount with respect to the Series 2007 A Bonds is paid or required to be paid to the United States of America as required by Section 148 of the Code, and at least once every five years thereafter, the City shall cause the Rebate Amount to be computed and shall deliver a copy of such computation (the "Rebate Amount Certificate") to the Authority and the Trustee. Prior to any payment of the Rebate Amount to the United States of America as required by Section 148 of the Code, a Rebate Amount Certificate setting forth such Rebate Amount shall be prepared or approved by (1) a 6 person with experience in matters of governmental accounting for Federal income tax purposes or (2) a bona fide arbitrage rebate calculation reporting service. Section 6.4 Payment of Rebate Amount. Not later than 60 days after the initial installment computation date, the City shall pay solely from amounts in the Series 2007 A Arbitrage Rebate Fund to the United States of America at least 90% of the Rebate Amount as set forth in the Rebate Amount Certificate prepared with respect to such installment computation date. At least once on or before 60 days after the installment computation date that is the fifth anniversary of the initial installment computation date and on or before 60 days after every fifth anniversary date thereafter until final payment of the Series 2007 A Bonds, the City shall pay to the United States of America not less than the amount, if any, by which 90% of the Rebate Amount set forth in the most recent Rebate Amount Certificate exceeds the aggregate of all such payments theretofore made to the United States of America pursuant to this Section. On or before 60 days after final payment of the Series 2007 A Bonds, the City shall pay to the United States of America the amount, if any, by which 100% of the Rebate Amount set forth in the Rebate Amount Certificate with respect to the date of fmal payment of the Series 2007 A Bonds exceeds the aggregate of all payments theretofore made pursuant to this Section. All such payments shall be made solely from amounts in the Series 2007 A Arbitrage Rebate Fund. Notwithstanding any provision of the Support Agreement to the contrary, no such payment shall be made if the City receives and delivers to the Trustee and the Authority an opinion of Bond Counsel to the effect that (a) such payment is not required under the Code in order to prevent the Series 2007 A Bonds from becoming "arbitrage bonds" within the meaning of Section 148 of the Code or (b) such payment should be calculated and paid on some alternative basis under the Code, and the City complies with such alternative basis. The Authority covenants that, if so requested by the City, it shall execute any form required to be signed by an issuer of tax-exempt bonds in connection with the payment of any Rebate Amount (including Internal Revenue Service Form 8038-T) based on information supplied to the Authority by the City. The City shall supply all information required to be stated on such form and shall prepare such form. Except for the execution and delivery of such form upon timely presentation by the City, the Authority shall have no responsibility for such form or the information stated thereon. Section 6.5 Reports by Trustee. The Trustee shall provide the City within 10 days after each July 15 and within 10 days after the fmal payment of the Series 2007 Bonds with such reports and information with respect to earnings of amounts held under the Agreement of Trust as may be requested by the City in order to comply with the provisions of this Article. Section 6.6 Disposition of Balance in Series 2007 A Arbitrage Rebate Fund. After each payment required in Section 6.4 is made and any additional amount necessary to pay the full rebate obligation is retained, the remaining amount in the Series 2007 Arbitrage Rebate Fund shall be retained by the City and used for any lawful purpose. 7 ARTICLE VII MISCELLANEOUS Section 7.1 Private Activity Covenants. The City covenants not to permit the proceeds of the Series 2007 A Bonds to be used in any manner that would result in (a) 5% or more of such proceeds or the facilities financed with such proceeds being used in a trade or business carried on by any person other than a governmental unit, as provided in Section 141 (b) of the Code, (b) 5% or more of such proceeds being used with respect to any "output facility" (other than a facility for the furnishing of water), within the meaning of Section 141 (b )( 4) of the Code, or (c) 5% or more of such proceeds being used directly or indirectly to make or finance loans to any persons other than a governmental unit, as provided in Section 141 (c) of the Code; provided, however, that if the City receives an opinion of Bond Counsel that any such covenants need not be complied with to prevent the interest on the Series 2007 A Bonds from being includable in the gross income for Federal income tax purposes under existing law, the City need not comply with such covenants. Section 7.2 Severability. If any provision of this Second Supplemental Support Agreement shall be held invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not invalidate any other provision hereof. Section 7.3 Successors and Assigns. This Second Supplemental Support Agreement shall be binding upon, inure to the benefit of and be enforceable by the parties and their respective successors and assigns. Section 7.4 Counterparts. This Second Supplemental Support Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be an original, all of which together shall constitute but one and the same instrument. Section 7.5 Governing Law. This Second Supplemental Support Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. 8 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Second Supplemental Support Agreement to be duly executed by their duly authorized representatives as of the date first above written. CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY By: Chairman CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA By: City Manager Seen and agreed to: U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as successor Trustee By Title 9 RECEIPT Receipt of the foregoing original counterpart of the Second Supplemental Support Agreement dated as of June 1,2007, between the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority and the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, is hereby acknowledged. u.s. BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as successor Trustee By Title 10 -< -I Eo- = ~ ~ -= e == ~ ~ = ~ =-- r-::l r.n. ~ .... l'Il 0 f ~ = .... = == ..... If) = = N 1 r.n. r-il ~ .C r-il =-- r.n. ~ ~I =.... ~~ -I = ~ -= e 00. ~ = E0- =-- Z r.n. r-::l ~ ~ .... l'Il >- 0 f -< = ~ .... ~ -< = ~ If) ..... 0 = = ~ N 1 r.n. ~ ; ~ Q ... ~ r-il ;.. = r.n. =-- U 00. ~ ~I =.... ~~ - J = .... Q ~ r:LJ. ~ .... 0 l'Il f == ~ -< .... = ~ ..... = = N r.n. 1 r-il ;! r-il ... r:LJ. ;.. =-- ~ ~I =.... ~~ oo~~oo~~~~ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~__~~____~~~N~~OOOO~~~~oooooooooo~~oo~~ ~~~MNN~~~~NN__NNOOOO~~NNOO~~OOoo~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~__~~~~MM~~~~~~~~~~oO~~OO~~NNMM~~MM ~~~~~~NN~~~~~~~~ooO~~~~~~~~~NN~~~~~~~~~N N~__O_ON~N~M~~~~~~~~M~N~-OO-~M~~~~~~M~-- NvN~N~N~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .... oo~~oo~~~~oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo OONNOONNNNOO~~OOoooooooooooooooooooooooo ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~oooo~~~~oooooooooo~~oo~~ ~~MMNN~~~~NN__NNOOOO~~NNOO~~OOoo~~~~~~~~ ~~~v~v__~~~~MM~~~~~~~~~~oO~~OO~~NNMM~~MM ~~~~~~NN~~~~~~~~oooO~~~~~~~~NN~~~~~~~~~~ NN__OOOO~~~~~~~~~~~~MMMM--OO~~~~~~~~M~-- NNMNMNNN-------------------- .... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .,.) .,.) .,.) o. .,.) 0 0 o. 0 .,.) 0 .,.) 0 0 0 o. .,.) .,.) ",. N 0\ 0 N '" '" t- oo 0 N '" \0 0\ .... t- 0\ N '" N N '" '" '" '" '" '" .... .... .... .... .... '" '" '" '" \0 \0 .... ~~~~~~~~gO~-=N~M~~~~~~~~~~~~~O~-NN~M~~~~ oco~oco~c~o~c~o~o~c~c~o~o~o~c~o~ogogo~og ~~~~~~~~~~g~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~g~~~~~ _~_~_~_~_~_v_~_v_~_v_~_~_v_v_~_v_v_v_v_v ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Ol NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNO ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~___~~oo ~~~~OOMMMMOO~~~~MM~~OOOOMM~~~~~~MMMM~M~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~OO~~--MMMM~~~~OO~~MMMM~~~~ ~N~~~~NNM~OO~~~~oO~~~~~~O~~~N~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~V~N~~~~~ON-NN-N-_-ON~~~~V~M~--~~v~N~ NO__ON~O~_~~~N~MV~M~N~-~~~~~~O~~~~M~N~-O N~N~N~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~O~ NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNO ~~~~~~_~~_~~~~~~____~~~~_~~~~~~~_~___~oo ~~~~OOMMM~OO~~~~MM~~OOOOMM~~~~~~~MMMMM~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~OO~~--MMMM~~~~OO~~MMMM~~~~ ~~~~~~NN~~OO~~~~oO~~~~~~OO~~NN~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~VVNN~V~~OO--NNNN--OO~~~~VVMM--~~vvMN ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~MMNM-- NNNNNM------------------ .... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o. 0 0 0 0 .,.) 0 0 0 ",. 0 o. .,.) o. .,.) o. .,.) .,.) o. '" .,.) 0 0 o. 0 0\ N \0 N t- N 0 0\ 0\ 0 '" 0 '" .... 0 \0 '" 00 0\ N - '" \0 00 0\ .... \0 00 <"), 0\ N ..... t- ~ ..... .,.) ",. ",. \0. "" "" "" ~ ~ ~ ..... .,.) '" ..... .,.) '" .,.) .... ~~~~~~~~~O~-=M~M~~~~~~~~~~~~~O~-NM~M~~~~ ~o~o~o~o~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~N~N~N~N~N~N oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooaoooooa ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ _~_v_~_v_~_~_v_v_~_v_~_v_v_v_v_~_v_v_v_v ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~oooooooooooooooooooooo _~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~oooo~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~MMMMMM~~~~MMMMMM~~~~NN~~~NMN~~NNMN~~NN ~_vvvv~v-_~~vv~v~~MMNN~~--~~--~~~~~~MM-- N~~~~~~~~~~~oO~~~~~~--~~--MM--~~MMMM~~~~ ~~~OM~~~OO~~~~~~~O~~~~~~~~OO~~~~NN~OM~~~ ~~NNM~_~M~~~OVM_~O~~~~~M~OM~~~~~~~O~-~O- ~~~~~~~~~_~~M~_O~N~M~~M~--~M~~V~-N~~~~MM ~~~~M~M~MOM~M~MONONONONON~~~~~~~~N N ~ M ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO _~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~oooo~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~MMMM~~~~~~~MMMMM~~~~MMMNNNNN~~NN~N~~~N ~_~~v~v~-_~~vV~VV~NMNM~~--~~--~~~~~~MM-- M~~~~~~~~~~~oO~~~~~~__~~_-MM--~~MMMM~~~~ ~M~~MM~~OO~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~OO~~~~N~~~MM~~ ~~MMMM--NN~~OOMM~~~~~~~~~~MM~~V~~~oo--oo ~~~~~~~~~~VVMM__~~~~~~MM-_~~~~~~__~~~~MM ~M~M~~MMMMMMMMMMNNNNNNNNNN~~~~~~~~ .... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .,.) ",. ",. ",. 0 .,.) 0 o. .,.) o. ~. 0 0 o. ",. .,.) 0 .,.) .,.) 0 0 \0 0\ .... '" t- N .... 00 '" 0 t- '" '" \0 0 00 \0 00 0 00 '" 0\ N '" N '" 00 N '00 0 .... 0\ .... 0\ '" o. \0. N 0\ 0 "" ..... .,.) \0' \0. ..c ..c \0. r-: r-: oti oti oti 0\. ~ o. - N. ~ .,.) - - \0 .... - .... ~~~e~~8~~gg~~~=2~2~e~~~~~~~~~~~@~~N8~~~8 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~N~~~~~~~~~N~~~ ~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= o '" ~ t- o. '" .... :i .... o '" ~ t- o '" .... .,.) .... o o o o. o o 0\ .... 0 '" r..: '" 0\ ",. 0 '" ~ ~ .... 0 '" r..: '" 0\ .,.) 0 .... ~ .- .... .... I < 0 0 0 o. 0 0\ ..... 0\ .... 00 "'< N \0 oti \0 t- \0. \0 N .... 00 "'< - N \0 oti \0 t-. o - .... ~ ~ -I = ~ ~ e ~ = ~ 00 ~ ... <I.l ~ = .a == = r-- ~ = = M 00- I roil ; N I r-:l .C < 00 ~ ~ ~I = = ~~ -I = ~ ~ e Eo- = ~ 00 ~ ... 0 f = ~ < ... = r-- ~ = = M 00 I roil ; r-:l .. 00 .. ~ ~ ~I =... ~~ EXHIBIT B DESCRIPTION OF SERIES 2007 PROJECTS The following sets forth brief descriptions of the Series 2007 Projects to be financed in whole or in part with the proceeds of the Series 2007 Bonds: Convention Center Replacement - This project provides for the replacement and relocation of the existing pavilion convention center on the same site. It will provide for approximately 150,000 square feet of exhibit hall, 25,000 square feet of meeting rooms and 32,000 square feet of ballroom space. The cost of this project is approximately $206,844,513. The Sandler Center for the Performing Arts - This project provides for the replacement and demolition of the former Pavilion Theatre, and the acquisition of land at the Town Center development for the new performing arts center. The cost of this project is approximately $46,700,000. Town Center Garage Block 10 - This project is for the construction of an approximate 851 space parking garage located in the Town Center district of the City. The cost of this project is approximately $14,145,245. Town Center Garage Block 7 - This project is for the construction of an approximate 947-space parking garage located in the Town Center district of the City, of which 735 parking spaces will be used by the City. The cost of this project is approximately $17,751,060. Block 7 Conference Center - This project is for the construction of a conference center on Town Center Block 7. The conference center will be approximately 24,000 square feet, which includes a 9,000 square foot ballroom. Total estimated cost of this project is approximately $8,645,604. Pedestrian Bridge - This project is for the construction of a pedestrian bridge to connect the public parking garage located on Town Center Block 12 to the public parking garage located on Town Center Block 7 and will span across Columbus Street. The bridge is 130 feet long and 10 feet wide. Total estimated cost of this project is approximately $1,805,000. Open Space Site Acquisition - This project provides for the acquisition of land for preservation and/or recreational purposes. Acquisition may include areas to remain in a natural state, land to be improved as parks and active recreation facilities, land to preserve flood plains and/or act as storm water management facilities and land to use for right-of-way to improve as trails. The cost of this project is approximately $49,494,757. Revenue Assessment and Collection System - This project provides for a comprehensive, fully integrated tax system to replace the computer systems currently used to support tax revenue assessment and collection. The cost of this project is approximately $11,480,900. City/School Human Resources Payroll System - This project replaces the City's ten year old payroll system with a new information system utilizing current network infrastructure. The cost of this project is approximately $9,648,061. B-1 Automatic Vehicle Locator System - This project will provide for hardware and software to be installed in the Emergency Communications Center and a GPS device to be installed in each first responder's public safety vehicle, which will report the vehicle's location to the Emergency Communications Center. The cost of this project is approximately $1,313,500. B-2 22764.000272 RICHMOND 2010794v4 TIDRD SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT OF TRUST between CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY and u.s. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as successor Trustee Dated as of June 1, 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS Parties............ ............... ........................... ................................................................ .................... .... 1 Recitals ........ ... ................ ............. ..... ...... ... .......... ....................... ... .......................... ....... ....... ...... .....1 Granting Clause....................... ......... ............................. ...................................................................1 ARTICLE I THIRD SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT Section 3-101. Authorization of Third Supplemental Agreement. ..................................................2 Section 3-102. Definitions. ............... ................................ ................ ............ ...... ................ ..............2 Section 3-103. Rules of Construction. ........................................................................................ .....3 ARTICLE II AUTHORIZATION, DETAILS AND FORM OF SERIES 2007 BONDS Section 3-201. Authorization of Series 2007 Bonds and Series 2007 Projects................................3 Section 3-202. Details of Series 2007 Bonds. ..................................................................................3 Section 3-203. Form of Series 2007 Bonds......................................................................................5 Section 3 -204. Securities Depository Provisions. .... ............................................... ......... ................5 Section 3-205. Delivery of Series 2007 Bonds. ...............................................................................6 ARTICLE III REDEMPTION OF SERIES 2007 BONDS Section 3-301. Redemption Date and Price. ....................................................................................6 Section 3-302. Selection of Series 2007 Bonds for Redemption. ....................................................6 Section 3-303. Notice of Redemption. ............................... .................... ................ ................ ....... ...6 ARTICLE IV APPLICATION OF PROCEEDS OF SERIES 2007 BONDS Section 3-401. Application of Proceeds of Series 2007 Bonds........................................................ 7 ARTICLE V ESTABLISHMENT OF ACCOUNT Section 3-501. Series 2007 A Project Account. ................................................................................8 Section 3-502. Series 2007B Project Account. .. ....... ...... ............. ..... ...... ................ .........................8 (i) ARTICLE VI SECURITY FOR SERIES 2007 BONDS Section 3-601. Security for Series 2007 Bonds................................................................................8 ARTICLE VII MISCELLANEOUS Section 3-701. Limitations on Use of Proceeds. ..............................................................................8 Section 3-702. Limitation of Rights. .................................... ......... ............................ ....... .... ............9 Section 3-703 . Severability. ....... ........... ......................................................................... .......... ........ 9 Section 3-704. Successors and Assigns...... ....... ................ ............ ......... ................... ........... ............9 Section 3-705. Applicable Law. . ........... ..................................................................... ............. .........9 Section 3-706. Counterparts. ........ .......... ...................... .................................................. .......... ........9 Signatures.... .................. ........... ..... ........... .............. .... ................. ............. ...... ...... ..... ............... ......10 Exhibit A - Form of Series 2007 A Bond .................................................................................... A-I Exhibit B - Form of Series 2007B Bond......................................................................................B-l (ii) This TIDRD SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT OF TRUST dated as of June 1,2007, by and between the CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia (the "Authority"), and U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION (as successor to Wachovia Bank, National Association), a national banking association, having a corporate trust office in Richmond, Virginia, as trustee (in such capacity, together with any successor in such capacity, herein called the "Trustee"), provides: WHEREAS, the Authority is a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia duly created by Chapter 643 of the Virginia Acts of Assembly of 1964, as amended (the "Act"); and WHEREAS, the Authority and the Trustee have entered into an Agreement of Trust dated as of September 1, 2003 (the "Master Agreement of Trust"), as supplemented by a First Supplemental Agreement of Trust dated as of September 1, 2003, and a Second Supplemental Agreement of Trust dated as of May 1,2005, pursuant to which the Authority has agreed to issue from time to time public facility revenue bonds or notes and use the proceeds thereof to finance costs incurred in connection with certain Projects (as hereinafter defmed) for the benefit of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia (the "City"); and WHEREAS, within the limitations of and in compliance with the Master Agreement of Trust, the City has requested the Authority to issue two series of public facility revenue bonds to finance the costs of the Series 2007 Projects (as hereinafter defmed); and WHEREAS, the Authority has agreed to issue the Series 2007 Bonds (as hereinafter defined) in the aggregate principal amount of $ , secured by a pledge of the revenues and receipts derived from a Support Agreement dated as of September 1,2003, as supplemented and amended by a First Supplemental Support Agreement dated as of May 1, 2005, and a Second Supplemental Support Agreement dated as of June 1,2007 (the "Support Agreement"), between the Authority and the City, and the City has agreed, subject to the annual appropriation by the Council of the City, to make annual payments that will be sufficient to pay the principal of and premium, if any, and interest on such public facility revenue bonds as the same shall become due; and WHEREAS, the Authority has taken all necessary action to make the Series 2007 Bonds, when authenticated by the Trustee and issued by the Authority, valid and binding limited obligations of the Authority and to constitute this Third Supplemental Agreement a valid and binding agreement authorizing and providing for the details of the Series 2007 Bonds; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants and agreements hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: ARTICLE I TIDRD SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT Section 3-101. Authorization of Third Supplemental Agreement. This Third Supplemental Agreement is authorized and executed by the Authority and delivered to the Trustee pursuant to and in accordance with Articles III and X of the Master Agreement of Trust. All terms, covenants, conditions and agreements of the Master Agreement of Trust shall apply with full force and effect to the Series 2007 Bonds and to the holders thereof, except as otherwise provided in this Third Supplemental Agreement. Section 3-102. Definitions. Except as otherwise defmed in this Third Supplemental Agreement, words defined in the Master Agreement of Trust are used in this Third Supplemental Agreement with the meanings assigned to them in the Master Agreement of Trust. In addition, the following words shall have the following meanings unless a different meaning clearly appears from the context: "Letter of Representations" shall mean the Blanket Letter of Representations dated July 11, 1997, from the Authority to the Securities Depository and any amendments thereto or successor agreements between the Authority and any successor Securities Depository with respect to the Series 2007 Bonds. Notwithstanding any provision of the Master Agreement of Trust, including Article X regarding amendments, the Trustee may enter into any such amendment or successor agreement without the consent of Bondholders. "Project" or "Projects" shall have the meaning set forth in the Support Agreement. "Securities Depository" shall mean The Depository Trust Company, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of New York, and any other securities depository for the Series 2007 Bonds appointed pursuant to Section 1.204, and their successors. "Series 2007 Bonds" shall mean the Series 2007 A Bonds and the Series 2007B Bonds. "Series 2007 Projects" shall mean have the meaning set forth in the Support Agreement. "Series 2007A Bonds" shall mean Authority's $ Public Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 2007 A, authorized to be issued pursuant to this Third Supplemental Agreement. "Series 2007 A Project Account" shall mean the Series 2007 A Project Account established in Section 3.501 of this Third Supplemental Agreement. "Series 2007B Bonds" shall mean Authority's $ Taxable Public Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 2007B, authorized to be issued pursuant to this Third Supplemental Agreement. "Series 20078 Project Account" shall mean the Series 2007B Project Account established in Section 3.502 of this Third Supplemental Agreement. 2 "Third Supplemental Agreement" shall mean this Third Supplemental Agreement of Trust between the Authority and the Trustee, which supplements and amends the Master Agreement of Trust. Section 3-103. Rules of Construction. The following rules shall apply to the construction of this Third Supplemental Agreement unless the context otherwise requires: (a) Words importing the singular number shall include the plural number and vice versa. (b) Words importing the redemption or calling for redemption of Series 2007 Bonds shall not be deemed to refer to or connote the payment of Series 2007 Bonds at their stated maturity. (c) Unless otherwise indicated, all references herein to particular Articles or Sections are references to Articles or Sections of this Third Supplemental Agreement. (d) The headings herein and Table of Contents to this Third Supplemental Agreement herein are solely for convenience of reference and shall not constitute a part of this Third Supplemental Agreement nor shall they affect its meaning, construction or effect. (e) All references herein to payment of Series 2007 Bonds are references to payment of principal of and interest on the Series 2007 Bonds. ARTICLE II AUTHORIZATION, DETAILS AND FORM OF SERIES 2007 BONDS Section 3-201. Authorization of Series 2007 Bonds and Series 2007 Projects. There are hereby authorized to be issued the Series 2007 A Bonds in an aggregate principal amount of $ and the Series 2007B Bonds in an aggregate principal of $ to (a) finance the Cost of the Series 2007 Projects and (b) finance costs incident to issuing the Series 2007 Bonds, in accordance with Article IV hereof. Section 3-202. Details of Series 2007 Bonds. (a) The Series 2007A Bonds shall be designated "Public Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 2007A," shall be the date of their delivery, shall be issuable only as fully registered bonds in denominations of $5,000 and integral multiples thereof and shall be numbered R-l upward. The Series 2007A Bonds shall bear interest at rates, payable semiannually on each January 15, and July 15, beginning January 15,2008, and shall mature in installments on July 15 in years and amounts, as follows: Year Amount Rate Year Amount Rate 3 (b) The Series 2007B Bonds shall be designated "Taxable Public Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 2007B," shall be the date of their delivery, shall be issuable only as fully registered bonds in denominations of $5,000 and integral multiples thereof and shall be numbered R-l upward. The Series 2007B Bonds shall bear interest at rates, payable semiannually on each January 15, and July 15, beginning January 15, 2008, and shall mature in installments on July 15 in years and amounts, as follows: Year Amount Rate Year Amount Rate (c) Each Series 2007 Bond shall bear interest (a) from its date, if such Series 2007 Bond is authenticated prior to the first interest payment date, or (b) otherwise from the interest payment date that is, or immediately precedes, the date on which such Series 2007 Bond is authenticated; provided, however, that if at the time of authentication of any Series 2007 Bond payment of interest is in default, such Series 2007 Bond shall bear interest from the date to which interest has been paid. Interest shall be calculated on the basis of a 360-day year of twelve 30- day months. (d) Principal of the Series 2007 Bonds shall be payable to the registered holder( s) upon the surrender of Series 2007 Bonds at the corporate trust office of the Trustee in Richmond, Virginia. Interest on the Series 2007 Bonds shall be payable by check or draft mailed to the registered owners at their addresses as they appear on the registration books kept by the Trustee on the first day of the month of each interest payment date; provided, however, if the Series 2007 Bonds are registered in the name of a Securities Depository or its nominee as registered holder or at the option ofa registered holder(s) of at least $1,000,000 of Series 2007 Bonds, payment shall be made by wire transfer pursuant to the wire instructions received by the Trustee from such registered holder(s). If the nominal date for making any payment on the Series 2007 Bonds is not a Business Day, the payment may be made on the next Business Day with the same effect as 4 if made on the nominal date, and no additional interest shall accrue between the nominal date and the actual payment date. Principal and interest shall be payable in lawful money of the United States of America. Section 3-203. Form of Series 2007 Bonds. The Series 2007 A Bonds shall be in substantially the form set forth in Exhibit A and the Series 20007B Bonds shall be in substantially the form set forth in Exhibit B, with such appropriate variations, omissions and insertions as are permitted or required by the Master Agreement of Trust and this Third Supplemental Agreement. Section 3-204. Securities Depository Provisions. Initially, one certificate for each maturity of each Series of the Series 2007 Bonds will be issued and registered to the Securities Depository, or its nominee. The Authority has entered into a Letter of Representations relating to a book-entry system to be maintained by the Securities Depository with respect to the Series 2007 Bonds. In the event that (a) the Securities Depository determines not to continue to act as a securities depository for the Series 2007 Bonds by giving notice to the Trustee and the Authority discharging its responsibilities hereunder or (b) the Authority, at the direction of the City, determines (1) that beneficial owners of Series 2007 Bonds shall be able to obtain certificated Series 2007 Bonds or (2) to select a new Securities Depository, then the Trustee shall, at the direction of the Authority, attempt to locate another qualified securities depository to serve as Securities Depository or authenticate and deliver certificated Series 2007 Bonds to the beneficial owners or to the Securities Depository participants on behalf of beneficial owners substantially in the form provided for in Exhibit A or Exhibit B, as applicable; provided, however, that such form shall provide for interest on the Series 2007 Bonds to be payable (i) from , 2007, if it is authenticated prior to January 15, 2008, or (ii) otherwise from the January 15 or July 15 that is, or immediately precedes, the date on which it is authenticated (unless payment of interest thereon is in default, in which case interest on such Series 2007 Bonds shall be payable from the date to which interest has been paid). In delivering certificated Series 2007 Bonds, the Trustee shall be entitled to rely conclusively on the records of the Securities Depository as to the beneficial owners or the records of the Securities Depository participants acting on behalf of beneficial owners. Such certificated Series 2007 Bonds will be registrable, transferable and exchangeable as set forth in Sections 204 and 205 of the Master Agreement of Trust. So long as there is a Securities Depository for the Series 2007 Bonds (A) it or its nominee shall be the registered holder(s) of the Series 2007 Bonds, (B) notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Third Supplemental Agreement, determinations of persons entitled to payment of principal and interest, transfers of ownership and exchanges and receipt of notices shall be the responsibility of the Securities Depository and shall be effected pursuant to rules and procedures established by such Securities Depository, (C) the Authority and the Trustee shall not be responsible or liable for maintaining, supervising or reviewing the records maintained by the Securities Depository, its participants or persons acting through such participants, (D) references in this Third Supplemental Agreement to registered holder(s) of the Series 2007 Bonds shall mean such Securities Depository or its nominee and shall not mean the beneficial owners of the 5 Series 2007 Bonds and (E) in the event of any inconsistency between the provisions of this lbird Supplemental Agreement, other than those set forth in this paragraph and the preceding paragraph, and the provisions of the Letter of Representations such provisions of the Letter of Representations shall control. Section 3-205. Delivery of Series 2007 Bonds. The Trustee shall authenticate and deliver the Series 2007 Bonds when there have been filed with or delivered to it all items required by Section 303 of the Master Agreement of Trust. ARTICLE III REDEMPTION OF SERIES 2007 BONDS Section 3-301. Redemption Date and Price. The Series 2007 Bonds may not be called for redemption by the Authority except as follows. The Series 2007 Bonds maturing on or after July 15, 2018, may be redeemed by the Authority, at the direction of the City, on or after July 15,2017, in whole or in part at any time (in increments of $5,000), at a redemption price of 100% of the principal amount, or portion thereof, of Series 2007 Bonds to be redeemed plus interest accrued to the redemption date. Section 3-302. Selection of Series 2007 Bonds for Redemption. If less than all of the Series 2007 Bonds are called for redemption, the Series 2007 Bonds to be redeemed shall be selected by the Securities Depository or any successor securities depository pursuant to its rules and procedures or, if the book-entry system is discontinued, shall be selected by the Trustee by lot in such manner as the Trustee in its discretion may determine. The portion of any Series 2007 Bond to be redeemed shall be in the principal amount of $5,000 or some multiple thereof. In selecting Series 2007 Bonds for redemption, each Series 2007 Bond shall be considered as representing that number of Series 2007 Bonds which is obtained by dividing the principal amount of such Series 2007 Bond by $5,000. If a portion of a Series 2007 Bond shall be called for redemption, a new Series 2007 Bond in principal amount equal to the unredeemed portion thereof shall be issued to the registered owner upon the surrender thereof. Section 3-303. Notice of Redemption. The Trustee, upon being satisfied as to the payment of its expenses and upon receiving the notice of redemption from the Authority not less than 45 days prior to the redemption date, shall send notice of the call for redemption, identifying the Series 2007 Bonds or portions thereof to be redeemed, not less than 30 nor more than 60 days prior to the redemption date, (a) by facsimile or electronic transmission, registered or certified mail or overnight express delivery, to the holder of each Series 2007 Bond to be redeemed at his address as it appears on the registration books kept by the Trustee, (b) by facsimile or electronic transmission, registered or certified mail or overnight express delivery, to all organizations registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission as securities depositories and (c) to each nationally recognized municipal securities information repository designated as such by the Securities and Exchange Commission. In preparing and delivering such notice, the Trustee shall take into account, to the 6 extent applicable, the prevailing tax-exempt securities industry standards and any regulatory statement of any federal or state administrative body having jurisdiction over the Authority or the tax-exempt securities industry, including Release No. 34-23856 of the Securities and Exchange Commission or any subsequent amending or superseding release. Failure to give any notice specified in (a) above, or any defect therein, shall not affect the validity of any proceedings for the redemption of any Series 2007 Bond with respect to which no such failure or defect has occurred. Failure to give any notice specified in (b) or (c) above, or any defect therein, shall not affect the validity of any proceedings for the redemption of any Series 2007 Bonds with respect to which the notice specified in (a) above is correctly given. Any notice mailed or provided herein shall conclusively be presumed to have been given whether or not actually received by any Series 2007 Bondholder. In the case of an optional redemption, the notice may state that (1) it is conditioned upon the deposit of moneys, in an amount equal to the amount necessary to effect the redemption, with the Trustee no later than the redemption date or (2) the Authority, as directed by the City, retains the right to rescind such notice on or prior to the scheduled redemption date (in either case, a "Conditional Redemption"), and such notice and optional redemption shall be of no effect if such moneys are not so deposited or if the notice is rescinded as described herein. Any Conditional Redemption in (2) above may be rescinded at any time prior to the redemption date if the Authority delivers a written direction to the Trustee directing the Trustee to rescind the redemption notice and any funds deposited with the Trustee in connection with such rescinded redemption shall be returned to the City. The Trustee shall give prompt notice of such rescission to the affected Series 2007 Bondholders. Any Series 2007 Bonds subject to Conditional Redemption where redemption has been rescinded shall remain Outstanding, and the rescission shall not constitute an Event of Default. Further, in the case of a Conditional Redemption, the failure of the Authority to make funds available on or before the redemption date shall not constitute an Event of Default, and the Trustee shall give immediate notice to all organizations registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission as securities depositories or the affected Series 2007 Bondholders that the redemption did not occur and that the Series 2007 Bonds called for redemption and not so paid remain outstanding. ARTICLE IV APPLICATION OF PROCEEDS OF SERIES 2007 BONDS Section 3-401. Application of Proceeds of Series 2007 Bonds. (a) The proceeds of the Series 2007A Bonds ($ ) shall be paid to the Trustee and shall be transferred to the City for deposit into the Series 2007 A Project Account in the Project Fund. (b) The proceeds of the Series 2007B Bonds ($ ) shall be paid to the Trustee and shall be transferred to the City for deposit into the Series 2007B Project Account in the Project Fund. 7 ARTICLE V ESTABLISHMENT OF ACCOUNT Section 3-501. Series 2007 A Project Account. There shall be established within the Project Fund a special account entitled "Series 2007 A Project Account." The portion of the proceeds of the Series 2007 A Bonds specified in Section 3.401(a), together with the $ good faith deposit previously paid to the City, shall be deposited by the City in the Series 2007 A Project Account. Money in the Series 2007 A Project Account shall be used in accordance with the provisions of Section 503 of the Master Agreement of Trust. Section 3-502. Series 20078 Project Account. There shall be established within the Project Fund a special account entitled "Series 2007B Project Account." The portion of the proceeds of the Series 2007B Bonds specified in Section 3.401(b), together with the $ good faith deposit previously paid to the City, shall be deposited by the City in the Series 2007B Project Account. Money in the Series 2007B Project Account shall be used in accordance with the provisions of Section 503 of the Master Agreement of Trust. ARTICLE VI SECURITY FOR SERIES 2007 BONDS Section 3-601. Security for Series 2007 Bonds. The Series 2007 Bonds shall be equally and ratably secured under the Master Agreement of Trust with the Authority's $165,000,000 Public Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 2003A, its $94,900,000 Public Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 2005A, and its $9,000,000 Taxable Public Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 2005B, and any other series issued pursuant to Article III of the Master Agreement of Trust, without preference, priority or distinction of any Bonds over any other Bonds, except as provided in the Master Agreement of Trust. ARTICLE VII MISCELLANEOUS Section 3-701. Limitations on Use of Proceeds. The Authority intends that interest on the Series 2007 A Bonds shall be excluded from gross income for Federal income tax purposes. The Authority covenants with the holders of the Series 2007 A Bonds not to take any action that would adversely affect, and to take all action within its power necessary to maintain, the exclusion of interest on all Series 2007 A Bonds from gross income for Federal income taxation purposes. 8 Section 3-702. Limitation of Rights. With the exception of rights herein expressly conferred, nothing expressed or mentioned in or to be implied from this Third Supplemental Agreement or the Series 2007 Bonds is intended or shall be construed to give to any person other than the parties hereto and the holders of Series 2007 Bonds any legal or equitable right, remedy or claim under or in respect to this Third Supplemental Agreement or any covenants, conditions and agreements herein contained since this Third Supplemental Agreement and all of the covenants, conditions and agreements hereof are intended to be and are for the sole and exclusive benefit of the parties hereto and the holders of Bonds as herein provided. Section 3-703. Severability. If any provision of this Third Supplemental Agreement shall be held invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not invalidate any other provision hereof and this Third Supplemental Agreement shall be construed and enforced as if such illegal provision had not been contained herein. Section 3-704. Successors and Assigns. This Third Supplemental Agreement shall be binding upon, inure to the benefit of and be enforceable by the parties and their respective successors and assigns. Section 3-705. Applicable Law. This Third Supplemental Agreement shall be governed by the applicable laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. Section 3-706. Counterparts. This Third Supplemental Agreement may be executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which together shall constitute but one and the same instrument. 9 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Authority and the Trustee have caused this Third Supplemental Agreement to be executed in their respective corporate names as of the date first above written. CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY By: Chairman u.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as successor Trustee By: Title: Acknowledged and Consented To: CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA, By: Title: 10 EXHIBIT A Unless this certificate is presented by an authorized representative of The Depository Trust Company, a New York corporation ("DTC"), to the issuer or its agent for registration of transfer, exchange, or payment, and any certificate is registered in the name of Cede & Co., or in such other name as is requested by an authorized representative of DTC (and any payment is made to Cede & Co. or to such other entity as is requested by an authorized representative of DTC), ANY TRANSFER, PLEDGE, OR OTHER USE HEREOF FOR VALUE OR OTHERWISE BY OR TO ANY PERSON IS WRONGFUL inasmuch as the registered owner hereof, Cede & Co., has an interest herein. REGISTERED REGISTERED R-l $ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Public Facility Revenue Bond, Series 2007 A INTEREST RATE MATURITY DATE DATED DATE CUSIP % July 15,_ , 2007 92774G REGISTERED OWNER: CEDE & CO. PRINCIPAL AMOUNT: DOLLARS The City of Virginia Beach Development Authority, a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia (the "Authority"), for value received, hereby promises to pay upon surrender hereof at the principal corporate trust office of u.s. Bank National Association (successor to Wachovia Bank, National Association), Richmond, Virginia, as trustee, or its successor in trust (the "Trustee"), under the Agreement of Trust (as hereinafter defmed) solely from the source and as hereinafter provided, to the registered owner hereof, or registered assigns or legal representative, the principal sum stated above on the maturity date stated above, subject to prior redemption as hereinafter provided, and to pay, solely from such source, interest hereon on each January 15 and July 15, beginning January 15, 2008, at the annual rate stated above, calculated on the basis ofa 360-day year of twelve 30-day months. Interest is payable (a) from , 2007, if this bond is authenticated prior to January 15, 2008, or (b) otherwise from the January 15 or July 15 that is, or immediately precedes, the date on which this bond is authenticated (unless payment of interest hereon is in default, in which case this bond shall bear interest from the date to which interest has been paid). Interest is payable by check or draft mailed to the registered owner hereof at its address as it appears on the first day of the month of each interest payment date on registration books kept by the Trustee; provided, however, that at the option of a registered owner of at least $1,000,000 of Bonds (as hereinafter defmed), A-I payment will be made by wire transfer pursuant to the most recent wire instructions received by the Trustee from such registered owner. If the nominal date for making any payment on this bond a Business Day (as hereinafter defmed), the payment may be made on the next Business Day with the same effect as if made on the nominal date, and no additional interest shall accrue between the nominal date and the actual payment date. Principal and interest are payable in lawful money of the United States of America. "Business Day" shall mean a day on which banking business is transacted, but not including a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, or any day on which banking institutions are authorized by law to close in the city in the Commonwealth of Virginia in which the Trustee has its principal corporate trust office. Notwithstanding any other provision hereof, this bond is subject to book-entry form maintained by The Depository Trust Company ("DTC"), and the payment of principal and interest, the providing of notices and other matters shall be made as described in the Authority's Letter of Representations to DTc. This bond is one of an issue of $ Public Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 2007A (the "Bonds"), authorized and issued pursuant to Chapter 643 of the Virginia Acts of Assembly of 1964, as amended. The Bonds are issued under and secured by an Agreement of Trust dated as of September 1,2003, between the Authority and the Trustee, as supplemented by a First Supplemental Agreement of Trust dated as of September 1,2003, a Second Supplemental Agreement of Trust dated as of May 1, 2005, and a Third Supplemental Agreement of Trust dated as of June 1, 2007 (collectively, the "Agreement of Trust"). The Agreement of Trust assigns to the Trustee, as security for the Bonds, (a) the revenues and receipts derived from a Support Agreement dated as of September 1, 2003, as supplemented and amended by a First Supplemental Support Agreement dated as of May 1,2005, and a Second Supplemental Support Agreement dated as of June 1,2007 (collectively, the "Support Agreement"), each between the Authority and the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia (the "City"), and (b) the Authority's rights under the Support Agreement (except for the Authority's rights under the Support Agreement to the payment of certain fees and expenses and the rights to notices). Reference is hereby made to the Agreement of Trust for a description of the provisions, among others, with respect to the nature and extent of the security, the rights, duties and obligations of the Authority and the Trustee, the rights of the holders of the Bonds and the terms upon which the Bonds are issued and secured. The Bonds are equally and ratably secured on a parity basis with the Authority's $165,000,000 Public Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 2003A, its $94,900,000 Public Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 2005A, its $9,000,000 Taxable Public Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 2005B, and its $ Taxable Public Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 2007B (the "Parity Bonds"). Additional bonds secured by a pledge of revenues and receipts derived from the City under the Support Agreement on a parity with the Bonds and the Parity Bonds may be issued under the terms and conditions set forth in the Agreement of Trust. Terms not otherwise defmed herein shall have the meaning assigned such terms in the Agreement of Trust. The Bonds are issued to (a) finance the acquisition, construction and equipping of various capital improvements for the City and (b) pay costs incurred in issuing the Bonds. Under the Support Agreement, the City has agreed to make payments that will be sufficient to pay the principal of and interest on the Bonds as the same shall become due in accordance with their A-2 terms and the provisions and the terms of the Agreement of Trust. The undertaking by the City to make payments under the Support Agreement constitutes a current expense of the City, subject to annual appropriation by the Council of the City. The undertaking by the City to make payments under the Support Agreement does not constitute a debt of the City within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory limitation nor a liability of or a lien or charge upon funds or property of the City beyond any fiscal year for which the City has appropriated moneys to make such payments. THE BONDS AND THE INTEREST THEREON ARE LIMITED OBLIGATIONS OF THE AUTHORITY PAYABLE SOLELY FROM REVENUES AND RECEIPTS DERIVED FROM THE CITY RECEIVED BY THE AUTHORITY UNDER THE SUPPORT AGREEMENT, AND FROM CERTAIN FUNDS, AND THE INVESTMENT INCOME THEREON, HELD UNDER THE AGREEMENT OF TRUST, WHICH REVENUES, RECEIPTS AND FUNDS HAVE BEEN PLEDGED AND ASSIGNED TO SECURE PAYMENT THEREOF. THE BONDS AND INTEREST THEREON SHALL NOT BE DEEMED TO CONSTITUTE A GENERAL OBLIGATION DEBT OR A PLEDGE OF THE FAITH AND CREDIT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA OR ANY POLITICAL SUBDIVISION THEREOF, INCLUDING THE AUTHORITY AND THE CITY. NEITHER THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA NOR ANY POLITICAL SUBDIVISION THEREOF, INCLUDING THE AUTHORITY AND THE CITY, SHALL BE OBLIGATED TO PAY THE PRINCIPAL OF OR INTEREST ON THE BONDS OR OTHER COSTS INCIDENT THERETO EXCEPT FROM THE REVENUES AND RECEIPTS PLEDGED AND ASSIGNED THEREFOR, AND NEITHER THE FAITH AND CREDIT NOR THE TAXING POWER OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, OR ANY POLITICAL SUBDIVISION THEREOF, INCLUDING THE AUTHORITY AND THE CITY, IS PLEDGED TO THE PAYMENT OF THE PRINCIPAL OF OR INTEREST ON THE BONDS OR OTHER COSTS INCIDENT THERETO. THE AUTHORITY HAS NO TAXING POWER. No covenant, condition or agreement contained herein shall be deemed to be a covenant, agreement or obligation of any present or future director, officer, employee or agent of the Authority in his individual capacity, and neither the Chairman of the Authority nor any officer thereof executing this Bond shall be liable personally on the Bonds or be subject to any personal liability or accountability by reason of the issuance thereof. The Bonds may not be called for redemption by the Authority except as provided herein and in the Agreement of Trust. The Bonds maturing on or before July 15, 2017, will not be subject to optional redemption before their respective maturity dates. The Bonds maturing on or after July 15,2018, may be redeemed prior to their respective maturities on or after July 15, 2017, at the option of the Authority, at the direction of the City, in whole or in part at any time at a redemption price of 100% of the principal amount, or portion thereof, of Bonds to be redeemed plus interest accrued to the redemption date. If less than all the Bonds are called for redemption, they shall be redeemed from maturities in such order as determined by the Authority. If less than all of the Bonds of any maturity are called for redemption, the Bonds to be redeemed shall be selected by DTC or any A-3 successor securities depository pursuant to its rules and procedures or, if the book-entry system is discontinued, shall be selected by the Trustee by lot in such manner as the Trustee in its discretion may determine. The portion of any Bond to be redeemed shall be in the principal amount of $5,000 or some integral multiple thereof. In selecting Bonds for redemption, each Bond shall be considered as representing that number of Bonds which is obtained by dividing the principal amount of such Bond by $5,000. If any of the Bonds or portions thereof are called for redemption, the Trustee shall send notice of the call for redemption, identifying the Bonds or portions thereof to be redeemed, not less than 30 nor more than 60 days prior to the redemption date, by facsimile or electronic transmission, registered or certified mail or overnight express delivery, to the registered owner of the Bonds. Such notice may state that (1) it is conditioned upon the deposit of moneys, in an amount equal to the amount necessary to effect the redemption, with the Trustee no later that the redemption date or (2) the Authority retains the right to rescind such notice on or prior to the scheduled redemption date, and such notice and optional redemption shall be of no effect if such moneys are not so deposited or if the notice is rescinded. Provided funds for their redemption are on deposit at the place of payment on the redemption date, all Bonds or portions thereof so called for redemption shall cease to bear interest on such date, shall no longer be secured by the Agreement of Trust and shall not be deemed to be Outstanding under the provisions of the Agreement of Trust. If a portion of this Bond shall be called for redemption, a new Bond in principal amount equal to the unredeemed portion hereof will be issued to DTC or its nominee upon surrender hereof, or if the book-entry system is discontinued, to the registered owners of the Bonds. The registered owner of this Bond shall have no right to enforce the provisions of the Agreement of Trust or to institute action to enforce the covenants therein or to take any action with respect to any Event of Default under the Agreement of Trust or to institute, appear in or defend any suit or other proceedings with respect thereto, except as provided in the Agreement of Trust. Modifications or alterations of the Agreement of Trust or the Support Agreement, or of any supplement thereto, may be made only to the extent and in the circumstances permitted by the Agreement of Trust. The Bonds are issuable as registered bonds in the denomination of $5,000 and integral multiples thereof. Upon surrender for transfer or exchange of this Bond at the corporate trust office of the Trustee in Richmond, Virginia, together with an assigmnent duly executed by the registered owner or its duly authorized attorney or legal representative in such form as shall be satisfactory to the Trustee, the Authority shall execute, and the Trustee shall authenticate and deliver in exchange, a new Bond or Bonds in the manner and subject to the limitations and conditions provided in the Agreement of Trust, having an equal aggregate principal amount, in authorized denominations, of the same series, form and maturity, bearing interest at the same rate and registered in the name or names as requested by the then registered owner hereof or its duly authorized attorney or legal representative. Any such exchange shall be at the expense of the Authority, except that the Trustee may charge the person requesting such exchange the amount of any tax or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect thereto. The Trustee shall treat the registered owner as the person exclusively entitled to payment of principal and interest and the exercise of all other rights and powers of the owner, except that A-4 interest payments shall be made to the person shown as holder on the first day of the month of each interest payment date. All acts, conditions and things required to happen, exist or be performed precedent to and in the issuance of this Bond have happened, exist and have been performed. This Bond shall not become obligatory for any purpose or be entitled to any security or benefit under the Agreement of Trust or be valid until the Trustee shall have executed the Certificate of Authentication appearing hereon and inserted the date of authentication hereon. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority has caused this Bond to be signed by its Chairman, its seal to be imprinted hereon and attested by its Secretary, and this Bond to be dated the date fIrst above written. CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (SEAL) By Chairman Attest: Secretary A-5 CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION Date Authenticated: This Bond is one of the Series 2007 A Bonds described in the within mentioned Agreement of Trust. u.s. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee By Authorized Officer A-6 ASSIGNMENT FOR VALUE RECEIVED the undersigned hereby sell(s), assign(s) and transfer(s) unto (please print or typewrite name and address, including zip code, of Transferee) PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF TRANSFEREE the within Bond and all rights thereunder, hereby irrevocably constituting and appointing , Attorney, to transfer said Bond on the books kept for the registration thereof, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: Signature Guaranteed NOTICE: Signature(s) must be guaranteed by an Eligible Guarantor Institution such as a Commercial Bank, Trust Company, Securities BrokerlDealer, Credit Union, or Savings Association who is a member of a medallion program approved by The Securities Transfer Association, Inc. (Signature of Registered Owner NOTICE: The signature above must correspond with the name of the registered owner as it appears on the front of this bond in every particular, without alteration or enlargement or any change whatsoever. A-7 EXHIBIT B Unless this certificate is presented by an authorized representative of The Depository Trust Company, a New York corporation ("DTC"), to the issuer or its agent for registration of transfer, exchange, or payment, and any certificate is registered in the name of Cede & Co., or in such other name as is requested by an authorized representative of DTC (and any payment is made to Cede & Co. or to such other entity as is requested by an authorized representative of DTC), ANY TRANSFER, PLEDGE, OR OTHER USE HEREOF FOR VALUE OR OTHERWISE BY OR TO ANY PERSON IS WRONGFUL inasmuch as the registered owner hereof, Cede & Co., has an interest herein. REGISTERED R-l REGISTERED $ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Taxable Public Facility Revenue Bond, Series 2007B 0/0 July 15,_ , 2007 CUSIP 92774G INTEREST RATE MATURITY DATE DATED DATE REGISTERED OWNER: CEDE & CO. PRINCIPAL AMOUNT: DOLLARS The City of Virginia Beach Development Authority, a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia (the "Authority"), for value received, hereby promises to pay upon surrender hereof at the principal corporate trust office of U.S. Bank National Association (successor to Wachovia Bank, National Association), Richmond, Virginia, as trustee, or its successor in trust (the "Trustee"), under the Agreement of Trust (as hereinafter defined) solely from the source and as hereinafter provided, to the registered owner hereof, or registered assigns or legal representative, the principal sum stated above on the maturity date stated above, subject to prior redemption as hereinafter provided, and to pay, solely from such source, interest hereon on each January 15 and July 15, beginning January 15, 2008, at the annual rate stated above, calculated on the basis of a 360-day year of twelve 30-day months. Interest is payable (a) from , 2007, if this bond is authenticated prior to January 15, 2008, or (b) otherwise from the January 15 or July 15 that is, or immediately precedes, the date on which this bond is authenticated (unless payment of interest hereon is in default, in which case this bond shall bear interest from the date to which interest has been paid). Interest is payable by check or draft mailed to the registered owner hereof at its address as it appears on the fIrst day of the month of each interest payment date on registration books kept by the Trustee; provided, however, that at the option of a registered owner of at least $1,000,000 of Bonds (as hereinafter defmed), B-1 payment will be made by wire transfer pursuant to the most recent wire instructions received by the Trustee from such registered owner. If the nominal date for making any payment on this bond a Business Day (as hereinafter defined), the payment may be made on the next Business Day with the same effect as if made on the nominal date, and no additional interest shall accrue between the nominal date and the actual payment date. Principal and interest are payable in lawful money of the United States of America. "Business Day" shall mean a day on which banking business is transacted, but not including a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, or any day on which banking institutions are authorized by law to close in the city in the Commonwealth of Virginia in which the Trustee has its principal corporate trust office. Notwithstanding any other provision hereof, this bond is subject to book-entry form maintained by The Depository Trust Company ("DTC"), and the payment of principal and interest, the providing of notices and other matters shall be made as described in the Authority's Letter of Representations to DTC. This bond is one of an issue of $ Taxable Public Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 2007B (the "Bonds"), authorized and issued pursuant to Chapter 643 of the Virginia Acts of Assembly of 1964, as amended. The Bonds are issued under and secured by an Agreement of Trust dated as of September 1, 2003, between the Authority and the Trustee, as supplemented by a First Supplemental Agreement of Trust dated as of September 1, 2003, a Second Supplemental Agreement of Trust dated as of May 1, 2005, and a Third Supplemental Agreement of Trust dated as of June 1, 2007 (collectively, the "Agreement of Trust"). The Agreement of Trust assigns to the Trustee, as security for the Bonds, (a) the revenues and receipts derived from a Support Agreement dated as of September 1, 2003, as supplemented and amended by a First Supplemental Support Agreement dated as of May 1,2005, and a Second Supplemental Support Agreement dated as of June 1, 2007 (collectively, the "Support Agreement"), each between the Authority and the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia (the "City"), and (b) the Authority's rights under the Support Agreement (except for the Authority's rights under the Support Agreement to the payment of certain fees and expenses and the rights to notices). Reference is hereby made to the Agreement of Trust for a description of the provisions, among others, with respect to the nature and extent of the security, the rights, duties and obligations of the Authority and the Trustee, the rights of the holders of the Bonds and the terms upon which the Bonds are issued and secured. The Bonds are equally and ratably secured on a parity basis with the Authority's $165,000,000 Public Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 2003A, its $94,900,000 Public Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 2005A, its $9,000,000 Taxable Public Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 2005B, and its $ Public Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 2007 A (the "Parity Bonds"). Additional bonds secured by a pledge of revenues and receipts derived from the City under the Support Agreement on a parity with the Bonds and the Parity Bonds may be issued under the terms and conditions set forth in the Agreement of Trust. Terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meaning assigned such terms in the Agreement of Trust. The Bonds are issued to (a) fmance the acquisition, construction and equipping of various capital improvements for the City and (b) pay costs incurred in issuing the Bonds. Under the Support Agreement, the City has agreed to make payments that will be sufficient to pay the principal of and interest on the Bonds as the same shall become due in accordance with their B-2 terms and the provisions and the terms of the Agreement of Trust. The undertaking by the City to make payments under the Support Agreement constitutes a current expense of the City, subject to annual appropriation by the Council of the City. The undertaking by the City to make payments under the Support Agreement does not constitute a debt of the City within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory limitation nor a liability of or a lien or charge upon funds or property of the City beyond any fiscal year for which the City has appropriated moneys to make such payments. THE BONDS AND THE INTEREST THEREON ARE LIMITED OBLIGATIONS OF THE AUTHORITY PAYABLE SOLELY FROM REVENUES AND RECEIPTS DERIVED FROM THE CITY RECEIVED BY THE AUTHORITY UNDER THE SUPPORT AGREEMENT, AND FROM CERTAIN FUNDS, AND THE INVESTMENT INCOME THEREON, HELD UNDER THE AGREEMENT OF TRUST, WHICH REVENUES, RECEIPTS AND FUNDS HAVE BEEN PLEDGED AND ASSIGNED TO SECURE PAYMENT THEREOF. THE BONDS AND INTEREST THEREON SHALL NOT BE DEEMED TO CONSTITUTE A GENERAL OBLIGATION DEBT OR A PLEDGE OF THE FAITH AND CREDIT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA OR ANY POLITICAL SUBDIVISION THEREOF, INCLUDING THE AUTHORITY AND THE CITY. NEITHER THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA NOR ANY POLITICAL SUBDIVISION THEREOF, INCLUDING THE AUTHORITY AND THE CITY, SHALL BE OBLIGATED TO PAY THE PRINCIPAL OF OR INTEREST ON THE BONDS OR OTHER COSTS INCIDENT THERETO EXCEPT FROM THE REVENUES AND RECEIPTS PLEDGED AND ASSIGNED THEREFOR, AND NEITHER THE FAITH AND CREDIT NOR THE TAXING POWER OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, OR ANY POLITICAL SUBDIVISION THEREOF, INCLUDING THE AUTHORITY AND THE CITY, IS PLEDGED TO THE PAYMENT OF THE PRINCIPAL OF OR INTEREST ON THE BONDS OR OTHER COSTS INCIDENT THERETO. THE AUTHORITY HAS NO TAXING POWER. No covenant, condition or agreement contained herein shall be deemed to be a covenant, agreement or obligation of any present or future director, officer, employee or agent of the Authority in his individual capacity, and neither the Chairman of the Authority nor any officer thereof executing this Bond shall be liable personally on the Bonds or be subject to any personal liability or accountability by reason of the issuance thereof. The Bonds may not be called for redemption by the Authority except as provided herein and in the Agreement of Trust. The Bonds maturing on or before July 15, 2017, will not be subject to optional redemption before their respective maturity dates. The Bonds maturing on or after July 15,2018, may be redeemed prior to their respective maturities on or after July 15, 2017, at the option of the Authority, at the direction of the City, in whole or in part at any time at a redemption price of 100% of the principal amount, or portion thereof, of Bonds to be redeemed plus interest accrued to the redemption date. If less than all the Bonds are called for redemption, they shall be redeemed from maturities in such order as determined by the Authority. If less than all of the Bonds of any maturity are called for redemption, the Bonds to be redeemed shall be selected by DTc or any B-3 successor securities depository pursuant to its rules and procedures or, if the book-entry system is discontinued, shall be selected by the Trustee by lot in such manner as the Trustee in its discretion may determine. The portion of any Bond to be redeemed shall be in the principal amount of $5,000 or some integral multiple thereof. In selecting Bonds for redemption, each Bond shall be considered as representing that number of Bonds which is obtained by dividing the principal amount of such Bond by $5,000. If any of the Bonds or portions thereof are called for redemption, the Trustee shall send notice of the call for redemption, identifying the Bonds or portions thereof to be redeemed, not less than 30 nor more than 60 days prior to the redemption date, by facsimile or electronic transmission, registered or certified mail or overnight express delivery, to the registered owner of the Bonds. Such notice may state that (1) it is conditioned upon the deposit of moneys, in an amount equal to the amount necessary to effect the redemption, with the Trustee no later that the redemption date or (2) the Authority retains the right to rescind such notice on or prior to the scheduled redemption date, and such notice and optional redemption shall be of no effect if such moneys are not so deposited or if the notice is rescinded. Provided funds for their redemption are on deposit at the place of payment on the redemption date, all Bonds or portions thereof so called for redemption shall cease to bear interest on such date, shall no longer be secured by the Agreement of Trust and shall not be deemed to be Outstanding under the provisions of the Agreement of Trust. If a portion of this Bond shall be called for redemption, a new Bond in principal amount equal to the unredeemed portion hereof will be issued to DTC or its nominee upon surrender hereof, or if the book-entry system is discontinued, to the registered owners of the Bonds. The registered owner of this Bond shall have no right to enforce the provisions of the Agreement of Trust or to institute action to enforce the covenants therein or to take any action with respect to any Event of Default under the Agreement of Trust or to institute, appear in or defend any suit or other proceedings with respect thereto, except as provided in the Agreement of Trust. Modifications or alterations of the Agreement of Trust or the Support Agreement, or of any supplement thereto, may be made only to the extent and in the circumstances permitted by the Agreement of Trust. The Bonds are issuable as registered bonds in the denomination of $5,000 and integral multiples thereof. Upon surrender for transfer or exchange of this Bond at the corporate trust office of the Trustee in Richmond, Virginia, together with an assignment duly executed by the registered owner or its duly authorized attorney or legal representative in such form as shall be satisfactory to the Trustee, the Authority shall execute, and the Trustee shall authenticate and deliver in exchange, a new Bond or Bonds in the manner and subject to the limitations and conditions provided in the Agreement of Trust, having an equal aggregate principal amount, in authorized denominations, of the same series, form and maturity, bearing interest at the same rate and registered in the name or names as requested by the then registered owner hereof or its duly authorized attorney or legal representative. Any such exchange shall be at the expense of the Authority, except that the Trustee may charge the person requesting such exchange the amount of any tax or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect thereto. The Trustee shall treat the registered owner as the person exclusively entitled to payment of principal and interest and the exercise of all other rights and powers of the owner, except that B-4 interest payments shall be made to the person shown as holder on the first day of the month of each interest payment date. All acts, conditions and things required to happen, exist or be performed precedent to and in the issuance of this Bond have happened, exist and have been performed. This Bond shall not become obligatory for any purpose or be entitled to any security or benefit under the Agreement of Trust or be valid until the Trustee shall have executed the Certificate of Authentication appearing hereon and inserted the date of authentication hereon. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority has caused this Bond to be signed by its Chairman, its seal to be imprinted hereon and attested by its Secretary, and this Bond to be dated the date first above written. CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (SEAL) By Chairman Attest: Secretary B-5 CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION Date Authenticated: This Bond is one of the Series 2007B Bonds described in the within mentioned Agreement of Trust. U.s. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee By Authorized Officer B-6 ASSIGNMENT FOR VALUE RECEIVED the undersigned hereby sel1(s), assign(s) and transfer(s) unto (please print or typewrite name and address, including zip code, of Transferee) PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF TRANSFEREE the within Bond and all. rights thereunder, hereby irrevocably constituting and appointing , Attorney, to transfer said Bond on the books kept for the registration thereof, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: Signature Guaranteed NOTICE: Signature(s) must be guaranteed by an Eligible Guarantor Institution such as a Commercial Bank, Trust Company, Securities Broker/Dealer, Credit Union, or Savings Association who is a member of a medallion program approved by The Securities Transfer Association, Inc. (Signature of Registered Owner NOTICE: The signature above must correspond with the name of the registered owner as it appears on the front of this bond in every particular, without alteration or enlargement or any change whatsoever. B-7 ~.,. :s~"",""'n~C'.s:'" '~.' ",~~~'.;Ij,' ~9>-''i '-".'.:'6;' fst ,'. ~~~ \~~~~~{jJ CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: An Ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute a lease for five years with Rosemont Interstate Center, L.L.C., for 0.15 acres of City owned land located at Sentara Way and Avenue A in the City of Virginia Beach MEETING DATE: May 22, 2007 . Background: Rosemont Interstate Center, L.L.C. ("Rosemont") would like to lease 0.15 acres of property from the City of Virginia Beach (the "City") located at Sentara Way and Avenue A in the City of Virginia Beach. Rosemont would use the leased property for access to its adjoining business and for parking. Rosemont has been leasing this property from the City since 2002. . Considerations: This lease would be for a term of five (5) years and the City has a sixty-day (60) termination option. . Public Information: Advertisement of Public Hearing Advertisement of City Council Agenda . Alternatives: Approve terms of the Lease Agreement as presented, terms of the proposed Lease Agreement or deny leasing of subject premises. . Recommendations: Approval . Attachments: Summary of Terms Ordinance Location map Recommended Action: Approval Submitting Department/Agency: Management Services / Facilities Management Offic City Manager: ~ It-. ~ 1 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER 2 TO EXECUTE A LEASE FOR FIVE YEARS WITH 3 ROSEMONT INTERSTATE CENTER I L.L,C'I FOR 4 0.15 ACRES OF CITY OWNED LAND LOCATED AT 5 SENTARA WAY AND AVENUE A IN THE CITY OF 6 VIRGINIA BEACH 7 8 9 WHEREAS I the City of Virginia Beach (the "City") is the 10 owner of that certain parcel of land located at Sentara Way 11 and Avenue A in the City of Virginia Beach (the "Premises")as 12 shown on Attachment A; 13 14 WHEREAS I Rosemont Interstate Center I L. L. C. I a Virginia 15 limited liability company I has agreed to lease the Premises 16 from the City for five years with an annual lease payment of 17 $1/186.56 for the first yearl escalating by four (4%)percent 18 each remaining year. 19 20 WHEREAS I Rosemont Interstate Centerl L.L.C. has leased 21 the Premises from the City since 2002; 22 23 WHEREAS I Rosemont Interstate Centerl L.L.C. would like to 24 enter into a new lease arrangement with the City for the 25 Premises for a term of five (5) years; 26 27 WHEREAS I the Premises will be utilized as an 28 ingress/egress point and for providing parking for an 29 office/flex building for the adjacent property owned by 30 Rosemont Interstate Centerl L.L,C'I and for no other purpose; 31 32 THEREFORE I BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY 33 OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: 34 35 That the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute a 36 lease for the term of five (5) years I between Rosemont 37 Interstate Centerl L.L.C. and the City, for the Premises in 38 accordance with the Summary of Terms attached hereto and such 39 other terms I conditions or modifications as may be 40 satisfactory to the City Manager and the City Attorney. 41 42 43 Adopted by the Council of Virginia on the day of CA10163 V: \appHcat ions'.citylawprod\cycom32' W pdocs\DO 14 "P002 '00028299, DOC R-1 May 111 2007 APPROVED AS SUFFICIENCY City Attorney the City of Virginia Beachl I 2007 APPROVED AS TO CONTENT t2bJL/f M-c}f. P,.,J /..f:-r~: ( .-1-. E"~ I Department 2'iial ~~.. ~ i:f F~~~ I ~~~<l~~ 'r ~~~~~i . ~ !il~ ;l1~~!l:;l1 0.0. f' 'II ~~~~~~ ~;ii !il"lOl~ i!I ,,:;! ~~~ ~ ~t!~~ I> j !~~~ II ",," ~ ~~!il"~ u-- ~ ~~~<l~ "" z .; ll:~,,~ !! Ii! CO " ~~.. 2~:!:! ~ ~~h SO '" ~~ ~...zz ;l1"~ ! ~~",;l!il: ..,"'..,'" "'i ~ @"'Cl'"'l ~!~., '" .,~",l1i! ~c~ )? z z ~"r~ .. .. ~~ h <>~ ~~ .i~l ~~ ~ I) i~ ~q ~\ ~","<"'''' ~ ",,~~t., ~(!:~ ~ I~~~~ ~~c., I;i ~ ~ ~ 'l! 9 l;I ~s!~ ~!!~;t.I ~ I:~~~ i!! i"S."~ ~ it l;I~!:<;llI ~ L.. ~;~~~ I ~ ..,J!l~~ ~>~ ; ;::~!il2;1la~~gstl;l ~~ i~q e~~~~ ;J ~ gUl "D:alD;" ~;Ii.:! ~!ilR.. ~ :li. CD::.1;:11t 4 ;ai=6~ ~ ;;~i~ ~P..-~ .00... ~~~w i ~ ~ ~ ~ 011 "! ~ .. '" " l'l ~ :J! J~~ ~..~~~ ~~.,~~ .'O.s.;i~ '[t ~~~~~ !::~~h ~~" ~~ i ~ ,.... o...._~ :"~Sio ~e~P >- ....,tlle) ~"I~~ !!! 2rY_~ /'-----_...c~~~ 55) EAsEMo.r ~, >-, 1", .., ... N ~ U 1::>0: ~~ ~~ ~ u ~... ;;!j l;Il:I .:. Attachment A SCV1N ~::':.f"" ~ ~n : ""lI! ~~" ~il ~~ ,...z~~ F>~ -M i~ ~~ ~~ \fTRQNIA STATE SYsTElol, SOUT>< ~ ""'""""AIt ~as ~~~~ ~~~~ i ~oS~ ~~ ~ ~ ! ' ~ :~~~ ;~..~ ! ~.~ ~~i i!~~ ~g~~ :u .-. .~~ ~~~~ C)~~~ ~ ~ .~ _>UJ~ ~on I ';~=- (, fl ~ __~_E_+,__ 3.0.03' __ -~"J~ ~'f-7"" _~I..\)_~--,~~~,,"J.....\)_---=:" .. ,--~I_~_= " ~ ~_... l.l ~~ ~~ _~I..~~a~~ t~~.~.E. ~ =h __~_~__-L--j ~....2 ~ ~~~ OO'OO~ ~ "" --S... --J VI ~ I~ 6 ;l:i M. .at.LD.LO N z -w-- ~ ~ ~ ~ . "'..;;; ,,~~ '" ... ~~,~ " "'.1 -~,iiTM - oE"';::/~~~; yo.:Jf%lf!k"u. ;, , \ '~Q'IJ"/JI"""~~JJ " __~_ ~~~~ E7 ' ~o'i ~Il\ -~I-~-1 ~~~ 1--2- ~~ ~r t:: I ~<o gl(l' r ~ ,; ---.-. --* __ r"l ~ ~ ~ ~+ __I::I=~~ ~~~ tl: I '" -i ~ fP~-~~~rot-. W _)f--....-_*_ i"" e~~Q-~Sz..CIt ~ ~ ~~ ...q~n.lP~~~; I~ ---;*I~-:-[ ~~ rg~2~~~~~ ~ ;-w '- --,~ ""~ ~-ii-:-~2~ ~'''7_":~.9~~-l~--: J "" L V ~..~ I ~I' c ~i~-:-I 1~~~E:8C ~l!~ i'~iO ---;-I-r-"~ ~ tr-" ~ "'iii (' ~ ~ I ---;:-..~-....s...--J I iii--- '! ~i~~j--~--~II- ; '-1i~;~~r-1----- :~' H~ ~:: ....""~ _)f--________ ~~ __ S1 tli~~ ~ ~ ~-.; ~ ~~I~tCE~ --.rI=~=:J :~~ t:_~ ~Il\ io I ~ I '" ~ I io I <>Il!:' ~" ____~ ~l'l t-- "iii ~"" ~ ~ ~..~ ~ ---;-1--;--'1 ~ -;- 'I' -~~- ~ -\ -T ~ ~I~ ,...... , .. ...~>Q.LO N I ~Il\ ~Il\ =Il\ =Il\ :D~ :D~ ~Dlt ~D~ I~z ,;;)J.A lf~ ~~ QlN 4" /1 ~~l\ _/ ~Bla :Il\ :!~ SUMMARY OF TERMS LEASE FOR THE USE OF 0.15 ACRES OF CITY REAL PROPERTY LESSOR: City of Virginia Beach LESSEE: Rosemont Interstate Center, L.L.C. PREMISES: Approximately 0.15 acres of City property located at Sentara Way and Avenue A in the City of Virginia Beach TERM: July 1,2007 through June 30, 2012 RENT: Rent shall be $1,186.56 for the first year and escalated by four percent (4%) each remaining year. Rent shall be payable either in an annual lump sum or in equal monthly installments. RIGHTS AND RESPONSmILITIES OF ROSEMONT INTERSTATE CENTER, L.L.C.: . Will use the Premises for ingress and egress and providing parking for an adjacent office/flex building owned by Rosemont Interstate Center, L.L.C. and no other purposes. . Will keep, repair, and maintain the Premises at its expense and will do so in a workmanlike manner. . Will maintain commercial general liability insurance coverage with policy limits of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limits per occurrence, issued by an insurance company licensed to conduct the business of insurance in Virginia. Such insurance shall name the City of Virginia Beach as an additional insured. Lessee shall provide a certificate evidencing the existence of such insurance. . Will assume the entire responsibility and liability for any and all damages to persons or property caused by any act or omission ofthe Lessee or its agents, etc. associated with the use of the Premises, . Will comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, and regulations in the performance of its obligations under the Lease, including City Code Section 23-59. RIGHTS AND RESPONSmILITIES OF THE CITY: · Will have access to the Premises at any time, without prior notice, in the event of an emergency. · Will have the right to require Rosemont Interstate Center, L.L.C. to surrender possession and control of the Premises to the City upon forty-eight (48) hours notice in the discharge of its powers, purposes, or responsibilities. · Will have the right to grant easements and rights of way across, in, under and through the Premises for streets, alleys, public highways, drainage, and other similar purposes. TERMINATION: The City may tenninate the Lease anytime prior to June 30, 2012 upon providing sixty (60) days written notice to Rosemont Interstate Center, L.L.C. V: lapplicalionslcilylawprodlcycom32\ Wpdocs\DO09IP002100029603. DOC r.~ /9~~~,.~~~ ::t;: " -'- "L, <~i.~ - !~~ '0..~- l11 ".."........._~~J> ...~~ ~~.i' CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: An Ordinance to Accept and Appropriate $530,259 to the Clerk of the Circuit Court's FY 2006-07 Technology Trust Fund MEETING DATE: May 22, 2007 . Background: The Clerk of the Circuit Court receives funding for technology by assessing Court fees. In the past, this money was awarded to the Clerk's Office through their State budget, so the City was not responsible for appropriating this funding. Last year, the State Compensation Board changed the way they distribute this funding, and the City is now reimbursed from the State for purchases made for these purposes. The Clerk's Office has been approved for $530,259 in additional funding above what was already appropriated ($631,452) by Council in September of this year. This funding will support a vendor to coordinate a redaction project. Redaction removes "private" information (as deemed by the General Assembly) on a public document. Certain recordings have included social security numbers, birth dates, and bank account numbers. With requirements to make these 'Public records available on the Internet, personal information must be protected. The General Assembly has negotiated with a land record vendor for a price to redact private information off these records. The Clerk's office estimates over eleven million records have personal information to be redacted by the land records vendor. . Considerations: This appropriation will not require any additional money from the City. The appropriation gives the Clerk's Office the ability to spend the funds with State revenue offsetting the appropriation. . Public Information: Public Information will be handled through the normal Council Agenda Process. . Alternatives: Appropriating the funding will allow reimbursement by the State and continuation of funding for technology. . Recommendations: Accept and Appropriate $530,259 in State Revenue to the Clerk of the Circuit Court's Technology Trust Fund. . Attachments: Ordinance Recommended Action: Approval Submitting Department/Agency: Clerk of the Circuit Court City Manager. ~ l.11JlJIhL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 AN ORDINANCE TO ACCEPT AND APPROPRIATE $530,259 TO THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT'S FY 2006-07 TECHNOLOGY TRUST FUND WHEREAS, the State of Virginia Compensation Board has modified it's reimbursement format for the Clerk of the Circuit Court's Technology Trust Fund. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: That $530,259 in additional State revenue is hereby appropriated to the Clerk of the Circuit Court's FY 2006-07 Technology Trust Fund to cover the cost of courtroom technology, with State revenue increased accordingly. of Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia on the ,2007. day Approved as to Content: Approved as to Legal Sufficiency: ~rf41sr- ~~cr CA 10392 V:\applications\citylawprod\cycom32\Wpdocs\D008\P004\00032900. DOC R-1 May 8, 2007 L. PLANNING 1. Application of MARY K. AGRUSO for an enlargement ofa nonconforming use at 103- B 57 Y2 Street re the construction of a sunroom. DISTRICT 6 - BEACH RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL 2. Application of HARRY R. PURKEY, JR., for the discontinuance. closure and abandonment of a portion of an unimproved alley at 736 Surfside Avenue re property line extension. DISTRICT 6 - BEACH RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL 3. Applications for extensions of time to satisfy conditions re the discontinuance, abandonment and closure at Jersey A venue and Virginia Beach Boulevard re reservation for future development (approved by City Council on June 21, 2001, June 22, 2004, and May 23, 2006): DISTRICT 2 - KEMPSVILLE a. LOPE and MERCY PILE b. CORNELIUS F. and ANTONINA BOYNTON RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL 4. Variance to S5(b) ofthe Site Plan Ordinance that requires all newly created lots meet the requirements ofthe Floodplain Regulations for GLENN H. GETTlER, JR., at 493 . Goodspeed Road re a master bedroom addition. AICUZ is less than 65 dB Ldn (Princess Anne Hills). DISTRICT 5 - L YNNHA VEN RECOMMENDATION APPROV AL 5. Variance to S4.4(d) of the Subdivision Ordinance that requires all newly created lots meet the requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance (CZO) for EDWARD A. and KATHLEEN T. KURPIEL at 2184 Princess Anne Road re the creation of a flag lot designed for a future single-family dwelling. DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE RECOMMENDATION DENIAL 6. Applications of VALUE PLACE REAL ESTATE SERVICES, LLC, at 1357 Diamond Springs Road DISTRICT 4 - BA YSIDE a. Modification of Proffers to allow a change of use from an office/warehouse facility to the development of a hotel (Conditional Change of Zoning approved on February 28,2006) b. Conditional Use Permit: 121-unit limited service hotel DEFERRED RECOMMENDATION March 13,2007 and March 27, 2007 APPROVAL 7. Application of SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION, L.L.C., for a Change of Zoning District Classification from R-5D and R-1O Residential Districts to Conditional A-36 Apartment District, Conditional B-4 Mixed Use District and Conditional A-12 Apartment District with a PD-H2 Overlay at South Independence Boulevard, Princess Anne Road and 1632 Salem Road, "Spence Farm," re 103 single-family dwellings, 347 townhomes, and 230 twin townhomes and Senior Housing. DISTRICT 1 - cENTERVILLE and DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE RECOMMENDATION DEFERRAL 8. Applications of CONNIE ONE, L.L.c., re thirteen (13) buildings with four (4) units each at Connie Lane, Connie Way and Baker Road: DISTRICT 4 - BA YSIDE and DISTRICT 2 - KEMPSVILLE a. Discontinuance. closure and abandonment of an unimproved portion of Connie Lane to incorporate the land into the adjoining parcels b. Change of Zoning District Classification from R -7.5 Residential District and 1-1 Light Industrial District to Conditional A-12 Apartment District RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach will be held In the Council Chamber of the City Hall Building. Municipal Center. Virginia Beach, Virginia. on Tuesday, May 22, 2007 at 6:QO p.m., at which time the following applications will be heard: DISTRICT 5 - LYNNHAVEN Mary K. Agruso Application: Exoansion of a Nonconforminl! Use at 103 B 57 11" Street (GPIN 24198131000002). Glenn H. Gettier, Jr. Application: Variance to Section 5B of the Site Plan Ordinance, Floodplain Regulations at 493 Goodspeed Road (GPIN 2419411128). AICUZ is Less than 65 dB Ldn. DISTRICT 4 - BA YSIDE AND DISTRICT 2 . KEMPSVILLE Connie One, L.L.C, Application: Change of Zoning District Classification from R-7.5 Residential and 1-1 Light Industrial to Conditional A-12 Apartment at Connie Lane and Baker Road. (GPINs 1468507212; 1468505086; 1468503176). AICUZ is Less than 65 dB Ldn. The Comprehensive Plan designates this site as being part of the Primary Residential Area, suitable for Jppropriately located suburban residential and non-residential uses consistent /\lith the policies of the Comprehensive Plan, The purpose of this zoning change IS to develop the site with multi-family dwellings. Connie One, L.L.C. Application: Discontinuance, closure and abandonment of il portion of Connie Lane and Baker Road. DISTRICT 6 - BEACH Harry R. Purkey, Jr. Application: Discontinuance, closure and abandonment of c; portion of a 15-foot wide alley adjacent to 736 Surfside Avenue, Lot 1. Block 16, Croatan Beach. DISTRICT 1 - CENTERVILLE & DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE South Independence Acquisition, L.L.C. Application: Change of Zoning District Classification from R.5D and R-10 Residential to Conditional A-36 Apartment Conditional B-4 Mixed Use and Conditional A-12 Apartment with a PD-H2 Overlay at South Independence Boulevard and Princess Anne Road and 1632 Salem Road (GPINs 1485050352; 1485251012; 1475856017). AICUZ is Less than 65 dB Ldn. The Comprehensive Plan recommends this site for a mix of residential, employment, and related uses. The purpose of this rezoning is to develop the site with a mixture of residential, retail, hotel, and office uses. DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE Appeal to Decisions of Administrative Officers in regard to certain elements 0, the Subdivision Ordinance, Subdivision for Edward A. Kurpiel, Jr. and Kathleen T. Kurpiel. at 2184 Princess Anne Road (GPIN 2414059787). All interested citizens are invited to attend. .. / I " -~-~/~"-" / Ruth Hodges Fraser, MMC City Clerk Copies of the proposed ordinances, resolutions and amendments are on file and may be examined in the Department of Planning or online at httD://www.vbgov.com/DC For information call 385-4621. If you are physically disabled or visually Impaired and neec assistance at this meeting, please call the CITY CLERK'S OFFICE at 385-4303. [;eacof1 May 3 & 10, 2007 ::'6946412 ~ i;' ~ ... <'> o <'> ... ~ ~1A:$ic~ ~~I' to;.'~ ....oa;...... ~.~ (f.~ · '$~ .-;;;' ~") (0'" :>) C \",.,- ';.) ,\1.- 11.1 l.:"-I.~"~~"~ ~"~'~ '~.J'" CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: A Resolution authorizing the Enlargement of a Nonconforming Use on property located at 1 03-B 57 % Street. DISTRICT 6 - BEACH MEETING DATE: May 22, 2007 . Background: The applicant requests approval to construct a sunroom to the front of an existing single-family structure. The applicant's dwelling is located on the rear of the subject parcel, facing 57%th Street. The use is nonconforming because there are two single-family dwellings on the same zoning lot. The R-5R Resort Residential District permits a single-family dwelling or a duplex on one lot. A duplex is defined as two dwellings within a single building. The existing dwellings are not within a single building, and are, therefore, considered nonconforming. City Council approval is necessary to allow any modification to the building. Considerations: The proposed addition will not encroach into the side yards any further than the existing structure. The proposed sunroom will extend 12.5 feet into the yard area facing 57%th Street. The required yard setback for this portion of the parcel is 20- feet. Even with the addition of the sunroom, the setback will be 28.8 feet, 8.8 feet in excess of what is required. In keeping with the cottage style, double-hung windows are grouped together on the three sides of the addition to insure open views and good ventilation. The siding below the windows shall be similar in style and color to the siding on the existing structure. The R-5R Resort Residential district permits 35% lot coverage, 60% impervious coverage, and 200% floor area expressed as a percentage of the permitted lot coverage. The total proposed lot coverage that will result from the sunroom addition of 213 square feet is 26%, which is less than the permitted lot coverage. The proposed impervious coverage has not changed. . Recommendations: The proposed enlargement is reasonable, will have a minimal impact, and should be as appropriate to the district as the existing non-conforming use. The neighborhood is an eclectic mix of single-family bungalows and cottages, and two and three story duplexes. Staff recommends approval of this request with the conditions below. Mary Agruso / Nonconforming Use Page 2 of 2 1. The proposed sun room addition shall substantially conform to the submitted Conceptual Site Layout dated March 1,2007. Said plans have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and are on file in the Virginia Beach Planning Department. 2. Exterior building materials shall be similar to the existing structure. . Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement Location Map Resolution Recommended Action: Approval. t Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department ^ ~ City Manag~ L . ~bt?'1 ~ 1 2 3 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ENLARGEMENT OF A NONCONFORMING USE ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 103 B 57 % STREET, IN THE LYNNHAVEN DISTRICT 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 WHEREAS, Mary K. Agruso (hereinafter the "Applicant"), has made application to the City Council for authorization to enlarge a nonconforming use with the addition of a sunroom on a single-family dwelling on a certain lot or parcel of land having the address of 103 B 57 % Street, in the R-5R Residential Resort District; and WHEREAS, the said use is nonconforming, as there are two single-family dwellings on the single subject lot, and more than one dwelling on a single lot is not allowed at this time. These dwellings were constructed when two dwellings on a single lot was permissible; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 105 of the City Zoning Ordinance, the enlargement of a nonconforming use is unlawful in the absence of a resolution of the City Council authorizing such action upon a finding that the proposed use, as enlarged, will be equally appropriate or more appropriate to the zoning district than is the existing use; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: That the City Council hereby finds that the proposed use, as enlarged, will be equally appropriate to the district as is the existing use. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: That the proposed enlargement of the existing single-family dwelling is hereby authorized, upon the following conditions: 1. The proposed sunroom addition shall substantially conform to the submitted Conceptual Site Layout dated March 1, 2007. Said plans have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and are on file in the Virginia Beach Planning Department. 2. Exterior building materials shall be similar to the existing structure. Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the May, 2007. day of -~ CA10391 V:\appl ications\citylawprod\cycom 32\Wpdocs\D009\P002\000 32991. DOC R-1 May 9,2007 MARY K.AGRUSO May 22, 2007 City Council Meeting Staff Planner: Karen Prochilo REQUEST: Enlaraement of a Nonconformina Use to add a sunroom to an existing single-family dwelling. ADDRESS I DESCRIPTION: Property located 103 B 57 % Street. GPIN: 24198131000002 COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT: 5-LYNNHAVEN SITE SIZE: 213 square foot (SF) addition to a 794 SF single-family home located on a 7,496 SF lot SUMMARY OF REQUEST The applicant requests approval to construct a sunroom to the front of an existing single-family structure. The use is nonconforming because there are two single-family dwellings on the same zoning lot. The R- 5R Residential Resort District permits a single-family dwelling or a duplex on one lot. A duplex is defined as two dwellings within a single building. The existing dwellings are not within a single building, and are, therefore, considered nonconforming. The approval of the City Council is required before any modification to a nonconformity may occur. The applicant's dwelling is located on the rear of the subject parcel, facing 57%th Street. The proposed addition will not encroach into the side yards any further than the existing structure. The proposed sunroom will extend 12.5 feet into the yard area facing 57%th Street. The required yard setback for this portion of the parcel is 20-feet. Even with the addition of the sunroom, the setback will be 28.8 feet, 8.8 feet in excess of what is required. LAND USE AND ZONING INFORMATION EXISTING LAND USE: Two single-family dwellings occupy the site, MARY K. AGRUSa May 22, 2007 City Council Meeting Page 1 SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: South: · Duplex / R-5R Residential Resort District · Hotel and associated parking and facilities / B-2 Community Business District · Duplex / R-5R Residential Resort District · Single-family / R-5R Residential Resort District East: West: NATURAL RESOURCE AND CULTURAL FEATURES: There are no significant natural resources or cultural features associated with this site. AICUZ: The site is in an AICUZ of Less than 65 dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. IMPACT ON CITY SERVICES There are no impacts to city services. EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of this request subject to the conditions below. The proposed enlargement is reasonable, will have a minimal impact, and should be as appropriate to the district as the existing non-conforming use. The proposed addition will not extend beyond the sides of the existing house and will be within the setback requirements for the yard adjacent to 57%th Street. The proposed sunroom addition will tie into the existing gable roof line of the front facade of the cottage and extend 12'-6" toward 57%th Street. In keeping with the cottage style, double-hung windows are grouped together on the three sides of the addition to insure open views and good ventilation. The siding below the windows shall be similar in style and color to the siding on the existing structure. The R-5R Residential Resort district permits 35% lot coverage, 60% impervious coverage. and 200% floor area expressed as a percentage of the permitted lot coverage. The total proposed lot coverage that will result from the sunroom addition of 213 square feet is 26%, which is less than the permitted lot coverage. The proposed impervious coverage has not changed. The neighborhood is an eclectic mix of single-family bungalows and cottages, and two and three-story duplexes, The addition of a sunroom to enhance the dwelling is in keeping with the mix of buildings existing in this R-5R district. The proposed architecture will blend in with the existing structure, and the residential use will remain the same. The request, therefore, is acceptable as submitted. subject to the conditions below. MARY K. AGRUSa May 22, 2007 City Council Meeting Page 2 CONDITIONS 1. The proposed sunroom addition shall substantially conform to the submitted Conceptual Site Layout dated March 1, 2007, Said plans have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and are on file in the Virginia Beach Planning Department. 2. Exterior building materials shall be similar to the existing structure. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. Plans submitted with this rezoning application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes and Standards. The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. MARY K. AGRUSa May 22, 2007 City Council Meeting Page 3 AERIAL OF SITE LOCATION MARY K. AGRUSa May 22, 2007 City Council Meeting Page 4 LANE -_:-._-~-_.:.--- 57%th Street \ - o.~. (Enero.J - '\ ~' \ \ 250' TO AT~ANTlC AVE l PIN",.A , P(.~(',f) . . 57TH (40' R/W) STREET :;. '- rc_," :- .~ LEGEND ~ Area ~ Area Comprising Unit .:a I Comprising Unit '8' o Common ArllO J' ~ i .:,...4$ Jj '\ , .,' ~:11 .... ",-. -~. i~ ~~ I ~ ImIIl"t B f'''"~ ~ r 3 ...\1.... lIIl~ ;,a t f' WT.:w. 'J ,~ :'ih~U. .~-.' ,'<~~ .. ....... : . ''< ~~.' :.'t4tp ~;rl6 CONDOMINIUM PLAT /03}1' -/03 '8' 57TH STREET A CO/l/DOM/N/UM " PROPOSED SITE PLAN MARY K. AGRUSa May 22, 2007 City Council Meeting Page 5 ~I ./"' G:lIi=lIi:=II&::Ir.;::i&::itJ::iJ....~ /.~. . ~'.. .... ',', . ~ '," ,'~ . iI,' ..~ //~~ :;;:~:;:::::;!;; : /,..< - ~;;'!~1If';J<!i-". :111." . --- PHOTOGRAPH OF EXISTING BUILDING PROPOSED ADDITION FRAMING MARY K. AGRUSa May 22, 2007 City Council Meeting Page 6 ~ ~ Q. ~ ;,0' n o n "" ~ I 1 I 07/18/06 I Subdivision Variance I Granted ZONING HISTORY MARY K. AGRUSa May 22,2007 City Council Meeting Page 7 NOI1VJnddV aSfl ~NIMIOdNOJ.NON ~ Z 1IJ ~ 1IJ ~ < ~ lJ) 1IJ D: ::) lJ) o .J U lJ) C ut: s: :s Ci:"'(3 E.E_ ~!! 00= c..> (t) <': .~ Ci> vi '" '0 '" In":;: .~ '" 0 > ",-- -- ~Q > '" '" 2.::: e;. cn....-c; ~~12~ ~~]8 ...0 ~:; g >~ . Oc:l-I/} U)..c:2o -_-v ~~]'~ ~ ~.~~ Q 2 -g 'g !::C13ctl_ O'ij;.r::: _I:: >- C..sci'::~ <o~~2 ~ ~.~ g 00 Q c: u: c. tI) "= ~E~i/i 'E Q.. t:. ;.: o~iii.a:: OoOU ~~~~ 0-,,,",_ '= V ... .:.::ell.lV> _~QO c:: Q.~.2 _..c>> ~:9~~ e g'::>: ''5u >< 0" ~~ ~ _ 0 o C 'E ..=c- :::!:'O j~i i;~U ':::.e~ ~~~ ~~~ j.~~ ~~r: ;<C ~ g ..0-' ~ ;~ ~ 0 l't: :: ;:: Q ~9- -t; ~ .J::.:n"" ~~~ .,goV,l ">- ;.~~ ~ ~ (; ~.: ~ .=>0- Bi.?8 ~g~o jH~ 88.8 '" <Ii tHhtdU =~fh~g~~~!~ H~ijUHJ l:~cu'x'::iQV)t::O ~~~ ~iaf~-~~ 2;'~5-;o~~~t~ :o::(/).-E:=oE.::..... ~ ~ g ~-~ ~ 5 ~ ~ ~ ~"g ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~E E .:-62';-8 ~ ~~.E ~ :=5c~.Sl1.ooc~ 0_0ft:'OQU$?._ ~~~~;==g'~g mmJW ~~o~.6j~'t;a2 ~tmnm! (/.I.~ 0 0'= 0 ..::: E ~ C\ 111111 mm mm :: " :"<.. ". " 0' ~~ ~ t :; ~i :~, \,.... ~ \[ ~. - , ~z.l " ~ '" "" ~ ;'0 ,~ ~'~I 't <; '" '" g .~ .0 '" o S =~ :': ;:: _0 ~ >-ti ~ s: ~ - ;;; ~ (,,, ~:::: ~'t ~~ g~ " o ;:: > " ~~ -c: " -.E gO:: "Uj E~ - 1; C';~ - " :!!G3 -' - " ~ 8- 8 .~ <Ii '" '" ~ ~ ,Z i '1IJ ' ;~ I ~ J ~I : U) i ;1IJ D: ::) lJ) o .J U J ~ It i!O U ~ c :i Q .g ~ .~ Q '" <Il ~ ~ i5 ~ ~"B 5 ~ -;:-.8 ~ 52 ~ - in .0", ~-=: i:~ o~ [~ ~] '=.:l. "- '" _0 "'.= 0- '" g ~ "en -- ~~ -r:g " ::20 -1- " c ~. g !1? .0 ~ <Ii Q -E ~ '" .2 ;;; 8- 2 ~ _'0 ~~ *~ w ;;!2 ~ o'~ ~ U)~-= ~~ o :l. ~tif1i w::5o>-';i zcc-~~ ==~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~ 2j .g ~.B - I;fi i! o ~.~:;. 0 E ~ ~~ ~ Hln (5; ...: ;Ii i ~ i ,~~ ~ " c.. ~ [ ... 0 <: '" - ~ -~ 6 ~ ~i ~ t-:; ~5 " "- -= 0 -! :; 0 ~o :3 C. ;:;.. ~ - " <Ii Q w~. ~ ~ s 'w ~] c ~E g~ 5: ~~ ,..."= c ~ zVi -55 <: C >-:: u-:: .a ~ ill ~ ~Eg~ 5B ~ > u 0 ... ~2 =: u . =8%~ i.~i ~ ;'i~~ ==o~ <; ,,~ <; ,g -0 ill ., ~ ~ ;0 "- og <:.;: ~ -~ .~ ~ ~~ g-E :,) ::: =t -= 8 ,g ~ u _ 9 NOI1VJIlddV aSfl ~NIMIOdNOJ.NON DISCLOSURE STATEMENT MARY K. AGRUSa May 22, 2007 City Council Meeting Page 8 Ol(l Camp Pendleton Street Closure (Alley) CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: In the matter of closing, vacating and discontinuing a portion of that certain unimproved alley designated as the cross-hatched area and described as "Indicates Portion of Alley to be closed (375 sq. ft./0.009 acres)" as shown on that certain plat entitled "PLAT SHOWING PORTION OF 15' ALLEY ADJACENT TO LOT 1, BLOCK 16 CROATAN BEACH M.B. 24 P. 37 TO BE CLOSED, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA" DISTRICT 6 - BEACH MEETING DATE: May 22,2007 . Background: The applicant, Harry R. Purkey, Jr., requests the closure of this unimproved alley for the purpose of extending the rear property line of Lot 1, Block 16, Croatan Beach, to the east by 7.5 feet, incorporating that property into the existing single- family parcel known as 736 Surfside Avenue. . Considerations: Evaluation of this request, as with any street closure application, is primarily based on current and future need for the right-of-way for vehicular, pedestrian or public infrastructure purposes. The portion of the alley proposed for closure is part of an undeveloped alleyway that runs north to south along the entire block. The Street Closure Viewers Committee recommends approval of this request, as it was determined that there will be no public inconvenience from the closure and abandonment of this right-of-way, subject to the conditions listed below. City Council has adopted a policy aimed at disposing ot right-ot-way to adjoining property owners in the Croatan community. Funds generated from the closure are deposited into an account dedicated to the purchase ot beach accesses in the Croatan area. The Planning Commission placed this item on the consent agenda because the proposed closure will not result in public inconvenience, the Viewers recommended approval, and there was no opposition. . Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 10-0 to approve this request with the following conditions: 1. The City Attorney's Office will make the final determination regarding ownership of the underlying fee. The purchase price to be paid to the City shall be determined according to the "Policy Regarding Purchase of City's Interest in Streets Pursuant to Street Closures," approved by City Council. Harry R. Purkey, Jr. Page 2 of 2 Copies of the policy are available in the Planning Department. 2. The applicant shall resubdivide the property and vacate internal lot lines to incorporate the closed area into the adjoining parcels. The plat must be submitted and approved for recordation prior to final street closure approval. Said plat must include a drainage easement over the entire property for future use as deemed necessary by the City of Virginia Beach. 3. The applicant shall verify that no private utilities exist within the right-of-way proposed for closure. Preliminary comments from the utility companies indicate that there are no private utilities within the right-of-way proposed for closure. If private utilities do exist, easements satisfactory to the utility company must be provided. 4. Closure of the right-of-way shall be contingent upon compliance with the above stated conditions within 365 days of approval by City Council. If the conditions noted above are not accomplished and the final plat is not approved within one year of the City Council vote to close the right-of-way this approval shall be considered null and void. 5. The approval is for the western half of the 15-foot wide alley, being seven (7)-feet and six (6)-inches by fifty (50) feet (7.5'x50'), adjoining the rear of Lot 1, Block 16 Croatan Beach. . Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement Planning Commission Minutes Location Map Ordinance Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends approval. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department City Manager~ k. ~o-<>"z.. 1 IN THE MATTER OF CLOSING, VACATING AND 2 DISCONTINUING A PORTION OF THAT CERTAIN 3 UNIMPROVED ALLEY DESIGNATED AS THE 4 CROSS-HATCHED AREA AND DESCRIBED AS 5 "INDICATES PORTION OF ALLEY TO BE 6 CLOSED (375 SQ. FT./0.009 ACRES)" AS 7 SHOWN ON THAT CERTAIN PLAT ENTITLED 8 "PLAT SHOWING PORTION OF 15' ALLEY 9 ADJACENT TO LOT 1, BLOCK 16 CROATAN 10 BEACH M.B. 24 P. 37 TO BE CLOSED 11 VIRGINIA BEACH I VIRGINIA" 12 13 14 WHEREAS, Harry R. Purkey, Jr. (the "Applicant"), 15 applied to the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, 16 to have the hereinafter described street discontinued, closed, 17 and vacated; and 18 19 WHEREAS, it is the judgment of the Council that said 20 street be discontinued, closed, and vacated, subject to certain 21 conditions having been met on or before one (1) year from City 22 Council's adoption of this Ordinance; 23 24 NOW, THEREFORE I BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the 25 City of Virginia Beach, Virginia: 26 27 SECTION I 28 29 That the hereinafter described street be discontinuedl 30 closed and vacated, subject to certain conditions being met on 31 or before one (1) year from City Council I s adoption of this 32 ordinance: 33 34 All that certain piece or parcel of land 35 situate, lying and being in the City of 36 Virginia Beach, Virginia, designated as the 37 cross-hatched area and described as 38 "INDICATES PORTION OF ALLEY TO BE CLOSED 39 (375 SQ. FT./0.009 ACRES" as shown on that 40 certain plat entitled: "PLAT SHOWING 41 PORTION OF 15' ALLEY ADJACENT TO LOT 1, 42 BLOCK 16 CROATAN BEACH M.B. 24 P. 37 TO BE 43 CLOSED VIRGINIA BEACH I VIRGINIA" Scale: 1"= 44 45 GPIN: 2426-37-4977 1 46 20', dated November 20, 2006, prepared by Gallup 47 Surveyors & Engineers, Ltd.1 a copy of which is 48 attached hereto as Exhibit A. 49 50 SECTION II 51 52 The following conditions must be met on or before one 53 (1) year from City Council's adoption of this ordinance: 54 55 1. The City Attorneyl s Office will make the final 56 determination regarding ownership of the underlying fee. The 57 purchase price to be paid to the City shall be determined 58 according to the "Policy Regarding Purchase of Cityl s Interest 59 in Streets Pursuant to Street Closures," approved by City 60 Council. Copies of said policy are available in the Planning 61 Department. 62 63 2. The applicant shall resubdivide the property and 64 vacate internal lot lines to incorporate the closed area into 65 the adjoining parcels. The plat must be submitted and approved 66 for recordation prior to final street closure approval. Said 67 plat must include a drainage easement over the entire property 68 for future use as deemed necessary by the City of Virginia 69 Beach. 70 71 3. The applicant shall verify that no private 72 utilities exist within the right-of-way proposed for closure. 73 Preliminary comments from the utility companies indicate that 74 there are no private utilities within the right-of-way proposed 75 for closure. If private utilities do exist, the applicant shall 76 provide easements satisfactory to the utility companies. 77 78 4. Closure of the right-of-way shall be contingent 79 upon compliance with the above stated conditions within one (1) 80 year of approval by City Council. If all conditions noted above 81 are not in compliance and the final plat is not approved within 82 one (1) year of the City Council vote to close the street, this 83 approval will be considered null and void. 84 85 5. The approval is for the western half of the 15- 86 foot wide alley, being seven (7)feet and six (6)inches by fifty 87 (50) feet (7.5' x 50/), adjoining the rear of Lot 1, Block 16, 88 Croatan Beach. 2 89 SECTION III 90 91 1. If the preceding conditions are not fulfilled on 92 or before May 211 20081 this Ordinance will be deemed null and 93 void without further action by the City Council. 94 95 2. If all conditions are met on or before May 21, 96 20081 the date of final closure is the date the street closure 97 ordinance is recorded by the City Attorney. 98 99 3. In the event the City of Virginia Beach has any 100 interest in the underlying fee, the City Manager or his designee 101 is authorized to execute whatever documents, if any, that may be 102 requested to convey such interest, provided said documents are 103 approved by the City Attorney's Office. 104 105 SECTION IV 106 107 A certified copy of this Ordinance shall be filed in 108 the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia 109 Beach, Virginia, and indexed in the name of the CITY OF VIRGINIA 110 BEACH as "Grantor" and HARRY R. PURKEY I JR. as "Grantee." III 112 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, 113 Virginial on this day of , 2007. CA10290 V:\applications\citylawprod\cycom32\ Wpdocs\DO 18\POO I \OOO31829.DOC R-1 April 18, .2007 3 APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: If!f!;t~~~ ).. 0-",- ~ ~ ~ . o '0 0> o o ~~ ::1::: <. ~; Z~ g~ <<0 Ow 'un ",'3 ~'-' <w '-'OJ ~~ ~ I U <( ~:~ z.. <(N I--ai <(" o a::: u b o o ~ ~ < '-' '" a. < :> z o '" < '-' '3 Exhibit A MARYLAND AVENUE (50' R/W) M.B. 24 P. 37 ~ '" .: ::: .. N ai " N ~ '" .: ~- >-"'0 w . ~ ...JD. 0 ...J ~ <(..~ _ N::5 lOa:iz ......~2.. ~.. N ai " w w << z => ~~g ,<'-' a::~~ <..>>' z << e;~5 ;:Con. wo-=> OS' S 85.45'4S~ W 107.50'(totol) 100.00' ~ e- O> .. ~~ ~ ;!; :Z 0: <..> ,00'00 , (,OIOl),OS'LOl 3 .s'oS.sa N e- '" .: N .. N ai " CD :.: <'>I gu Q Cl ID<( W ZI.L>-.W~lIl :fOW~lD"'O Oz::ll- .:...1 :I:O<(OZ U (/) i= ...J<(;!; I-CC. 01-- .W <OtOl-<("<lD ~lL""1-0:>O Za::: I-- ~U <( .., o <( ~ ~ .......... a::: 0-:- tO~ '-": ~ ~5~ Z~~ ~~~ <g~ W Q en I.J.. a::: ::> III .0 in g~ o z <( Z <3 0:: 5 :i u <( W lD <( Z <3 0:: 5 <0 o g ~ 1:i <D :> ~ o z , .. o '" ~~~ vjON <<<<< CL~~~ 3~g~ ~~8:i" <:J I-~ "''''w ~~: w..,- >N~ "'..."" => '" '" 5 'g ," ~ ~ 0, "'I ~ ~ b REQUEST: Discontinuance. closure and abandonment. of the western 7.5 feet portion of a 15 feet wide alley adjacent to 736 Surfside Avenue Stll"et Oosure (Alley) HARRY R. PURKEY, JR. Agenda Item 7 April 11, 2007 Public Hearing Staff Planner: Karen Prochilo ADDRESS I DESCRIPTION: Property located at western 7.5 feet of an unimproved, unnamed alley adjacent to the rear property line of 736 South Surfside Avenue (Lot 1 Block 16). COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT: 6-BEACH SITE SIZE: 375 square feet SUMMARY OF REQUEST The applicant requests the closure of this unimproved alley for the purpose of extending the rear property line to the east by 7.5 feet, incorporating that property into the existing single-family parcel. LAND USE AND ZONING INFORMATION EXISTING LAND USE: The portion of the alley proposed for closure is part of an undeveloped alleyway that runs north to south along the entire block between Aqua Lane and South Maryland Avenue. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: South: East: . Single-family dwelling I R-10 Residential District . Across South Maryland Avenue, single-family dwelling I R-10 Residential District . Across unimproved alley, single-family dwelling I R-10 Residential District . Across South Surfside Avenue, multi-family I A-12 Apartment District West: HARRY R. PURKEY,JR. Agenda Item 7 Page 1 NATURAL RESOURCE AND CULTURAL FEATURES: The site does not have any significant historical, cultural or environmental features. AICUZ: The site is in an AICUZ of 65 dB Ldn to 70 dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. IMPACT ON CITY SERVICES WATER AND SEWER: There are no objections from Public Utilities regarding the proposed street closure. PRIVATE UTILITIES: Preliminary comments from private utility companies indicate that there are no private utilities within the area proposed for closure. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT: A private drainage easement shall be retained for Block 16, Lots 1 through 20 of Croatan Beach Sub-division to insure proper drainage of these lots. EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of this request with the conditions below. Evaluation: Evaluation of this request, as in any street closure application is primarily based on current and future need for the right-of-way for vehicular, pedestrian or public infrastructure purposes. The portion of the alley proposed for closure is part of an undeveloped alleyway that runs north to south along the entire block. The Street Closure Viewers Committee recommends approval of this request, as it was determined that there will be no public inconvenience from the closure and abandonment of this right-of-way, subject to the conditions listed below. City Council has adopted a policy aimed at disposing of right-of-way to adjoining property owners in the Croatan community. Funds generated from the closure are deposited into an account dedicated to the purchase of beach access in the Croatan area. CONDITIONS 1. The City Attorney's Office will make the final determination regarding ownership of the underlying fee. The purchase price to be paid to the City shall be determined according to the .Policy Regarding Purchase of City's Interest in Streets Pursuant to Street Closures," approved by City Council. Copies of the policy are available in the Planning Department. 2. The applicant shall resubdivide the property and vacate internal lot lines to incorporate the closed area HARRY R.PURKEY,JR. Agenda Item 7 Page 2 into the adjoining parcels. The plat must be submitted and approved for recordation prior to final street closure approval. Said plat must include a drainage easement over the entire property for future use as deemed necessary by the City of Virginia Beach. 3. The applicant shall verify that no private utilities exist within the right-of-way proposed for closure. Preliminary comments from the utility companies indicate that there are no private utilities within the right-of-way proposed for closure. If private utilities do exist, easements satisfactory to the utility company must be provided. 4. Closure of the right-of-way shall be contingent upon compliance with the above stated conditions within 365 days of approval by City Council. If the conditions noted above are not accomplished and the final plat is not approved within one year of the City Council vote to close the right-of-way this approval shall be considered null and void. 5. The approval is for the western half of the 15-foot wide of the alley, being seven (7)-feet and six (6)- inches by fifty (50) feet (7.5'x50'), adjoining the rear of Lot 1, Block 16 Croatan Beach. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. Plans submitted with this rezoning application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes and Standards. The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. HARRY RPURKEY,JR Agenda Item 7 Page 3 AERIAL OF SITE LOCATION HARRY R.PURKEY,JR. Agenda Item 7 Page 4 - J.ECEND f\:'\] lNlllC.4. 'rES POR'Rt'N Of" AI!.EY ~ "TO BE Cl..OSEO (375 "'I_ ft./O.009 -) CROATAN BEACH 1ol.8. 2+ P. 3'1 'Dl.OCK 18 12 11 NoB. 24 P.37 M.a. 2+ P. 37 15' ALLEY E M.9. 24 P.37 Ii (UNDE\1ElOF'ED) ~ ICJ ~i ~ '" ~ ! 11 "c: .s t.m' .. ~ ~ ;.'" ... GPlN:242&-.37-4977 ti, "'- S :E ~ 2 ...~ 8-- \l.a. 2~ P. 3:J ~ ~ !il ~ ~ ? III Q z ..... 5l).OQ' H 0-4'4'15" W Sl&SIDE AVENUE (sa R/W) (I'ORlIEIIl..Y lw.E A'IE.) Il,a. 24 P. 37 I)' 20' r"}---- 4()' 60' , SURVEY OF AREA TO BE Cl..:OSED HARRY R. PURKEY,JR. Agenda Item 7 Page 5 f Street Closure (Alley) 1 02/27/07 Street Closure Granted 2 10/24/04 Street Closure Granted 3 09/23/03 Street Closure Granted 4 08/13/91 Street Closure Granted ZONING HISTORY HARRY R.PURKEY,JR. Agenda ,Item 7 Pag~ 6 NOIlmfiddV HlIilS01J lRHlI1S 1- Z w :::E w 1- ~ rJ) w a: :::l rJ) o ...J (,,) rJ) o o '~ "'og ~i; ~'> .~ ",eg> '~ ~'~ ~=g Q-S g 31.,," e~~ m ~,.~ "~~ a; ';; <> .. ::>....::: ~ :(I)o.'5{; 0"'" 'r:; <31 gB en _''; ,S Qs-5~~ -'~s.~~ ~!if~* j2~"dig .,...,~ .""-0 C Q~-=-- oZ g.~i -< 0 eo.... .. "";;-t 5iE,5 t);;~< dc~- ::: g.~;,; ~::~~ ~.@-~ b-- e lb ",0::>- ..x:--f!::! =!Sf6,~ ~ ~:E- .:::le! i;; 1 0. ,'t:) c,,- ... t.t ..Jg -:-:i = .... ~ <: ...... ~~ ~:e 8g, "E~ ~~ ij ~c 0)0 a ~ Z;o~ J:;:!:9 0'0.0 i ~i e Co.E ,l!!,O;; ~~i 2~~ 'C.i-= ~~3 ~ ...'" ~-l;C ~ !,; ='1A~ ", ~w ~ a.~ g~~ Eik ~~:~-~ ~~~o ,~Q a-~ l~8~ -Q....* ~S~ e '6,,;;,;'8 aoaO ~ ~o .>'" 1ft.. -<;10..... 2~::~ &: <: g,.e ~ ,~ral) - E- Ii! g,g~ 8:si .;; Q..~,$ c:E-:;.-S. ~ g E ~ ~ g ~o ~.~~:g, g<<=~~.2 "'.. a::!!.$iij,..","'= $. ., it", ::> .. E .$;; 'J: c: o':;:=14~~;...~<e36 ci..~ 2 ,i! ';; -~- 0 ,Q't; 0 :S.EE:!ile!e9~ ;:t)8~=0Q.=aeE ~ ~ ..;:.~: ~.le1i.~ E ~.~g3.'tS~ e!: ~ ~ ; i,~Q{t oS! t.U'~ ~O ~ ~i->.,''t)'.(;.<>'i ',~c & ~~;~ ~ -a ~' t ,f! ~ ~~:o~=.=~e..J ,e'~v~ F:~' 's";-: ~ ! S.~! 'O,~ a-~~a~~ '5, "... Q> "'-..",.~..... ~.\!;;;; 'ii o'Ee ~~{i.j ~~~,:,gg~~...l!i~ ~!_~,~!11;ioc<e~ ~!~:i~~-~o:~~:e E -:~~~:.. &.li! e~" (I),t~J!~'::: a;:~ =-':,~ :p.1!!o or;.!! E 1> e;;; '" eSt.,g...,QcQoeoo@ .S",.:li~o'ii Q,<> os;;,;.::'" eS;g.6~~E~!:~C;~ .5:!!-ii"g,,-"'..::xgo ..,~~o -:"-"il: ~.... ~so.g.. ~~ iz~ e~s':<:E~7:ll:o<>..t\ ~..g S?1:-e12J; :^;~ .. ",a",~,,-'''''''~1- i:gig~.g~i;c~2 !c;oac~OO~<lQ g,8SE8.:li!-:;~~$ I:'>il> ~ ,J:; :st; ''10 _t:-" a1~.g Qo-... 0... gl;!1,8, .e=1i~ " c"E~!Co e8g,:::g, .!g0~~ "00.!!.S1' - ~i'iCi'; ~""-:~~ R~ q> ~t; "";S -; 0 :::: ~~:!-~ ""0"'<>- Eg.~:! 1- ~'e 5. ~ ~ 'i ! ~s!~~ 11 is ti is E ;i ..':'9 ~g JI >-7;1'0 ~ "I 'e;;-5'O~/11 o~.,.,.";::,, l :: i j;'U' i zt:.8e~ i~ of"'~~ I;? ~::> 1! ';; a\, I~ u-: 1;;.:Ii '2 '-, 100 it . ~ -;; .g'~......, l': S::E~g,.g :;J ffi 8l:'g'~ !i UCi'lJC0 iOlt ..;; ...., ,,;; <> "" 5 0... rit: %:'~ la;; 0:0: "" .; i j 8. g (5 g; ~ $ c: '" ::> E S :;t "" '" o 0 ~ ~ w 0 '0 ~,~ .. 8i 0 ,.,J _ ~~, ~.'; ~ ~ oci. :v. ....:E g~ ~ ~ ;." ~ ltii ""i~..2w < ~-22~ ~f E'~ s.; ~ ;; 8u;_s ~, s.~.8 v.-=~ 1;1: :Q.~_C ;"~~! =? =:0..... 1 -"; ,;. '" -:l: &. Ii 1; :t ... ." ~ B ~ -;,: ~..;: =^ :; C1:? - ~ .;;:, ~ ~~ 'a; _ .~~ ~tJ $.~ !~ <':~ -Q ",., .;. ~"d. -~ s~ ~ i! .~~ z e :2 IS ~ '" Q :: ~ '" ., 1i' ~ ~ ~ S ~ ,~o 5 ~ti ~ ~=.~ ~ i~j ? c g~E $~ (J....c S?-i;; !2~ci.:::l:g =~~~5~ ~.~ ~~-~~ ~~i.si'5 OoQ,.~~S' )o,c=ll.2;;: ~ ~.~ Ii; o...g.o".- c::""o=",,g ~t~~~~ :.~,~ ~.': ~ 0; ~>-~ 1.,1 ~ .::;''1;: c ;;; g c ~"::. ,~~j ~ ~ ~.~E;;.<:';I; ~ E~€ S .~:::'S:E.~ S 5t .c:..J ,::: Q':;"~~ en E ~ .. e.~ ~.~ o~ 11 '*'7: !i}~ ~~ e~ ~B ~I s~ ::s; II _e !3s vi '" '" c '0 '" "" i :;:: c '" c ! ~~ '0 8. 8 " l- e ;;e,.; .re Q ~~ ~~ ~~ '1>'1:> "'", 2iii ~g :55 =g 2'a '1>'" ~o ~~ ue >< )~ " 12 f~ ~ t~ t:~ii g='i ~tl NOI1VJllddV ffiIilS01J ltlffiI1S N ~ ,~ e '" $; is Q. '" .Q I ($ .fZ .... ~g ~~ ~.~ ~~. fj ., J:::: 0 -:e. 2Q ~ ,% ~ :5 $~ tic x DISCLOSURE STATEMENT HARRY R. pURKEY,JR. Agenda Item 7 Page 7 Item #7 Harry R. Purkey, Jr. Discontinuance, closure and abandonment of a portion of a 15-foot wide alley located adjacent to 736 Surfside Avenue, Lot 1, Block 16, Croatan District 6 Beach April 11, 2007 CONSENT Janice Anderson: The next matter is agenda item 7. That is the application of Harry R. Purkey, Jr. It is a request for a discontinuance, closure and abandonment of a portion of a 15-foot wide alley in the Croatan Section located at 736 Surfside Avenue in the Beach District. Mr. Bourdon. Eddie Bourdon: Thank you again Madame Secretary. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Secretary, Eddie Bourdon, for the record, representing the application. It is a privilege to represent Mr. Purkey today. We appreciate this item being placed on the consent agenda. Janice Anderson: Thank you. Is there any objection to this matter being placed on the consent agenda? Kathy Katsias will review this one for us. Kathy Katsias: Good afternoon. This is a request for discontinuance, closure and abandonment of the western 7.5 feet portion of a 15-foot wide alley adjacent to 736 Surfside Avenue. The applicant requests the closure of this unimproved alley for the purpose of extending the rear property line to the east by 7.5 feet, incorporating that property into the existing singIe- family parcel. The staff recommends approval and we agree with the staff Therefore, we placed it on the consent agenda. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I make a motion to approve the following item 7. Barry Knight: Thank you. There is a motion on the floor by J an Anderson and seconded by Don Horsley. I'll call for the question. AYE 10 NAY 0 ABSO ABSENT 1 ANDERSON AYE BERNAS AYE CRABTREE AYE HENLEY AYE HORSLEY AYE KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE LIVAS AYE REDMOND AYE STRANGE WOOD AYE ABSENT Ed Weeden: By a vote of 10-0, the Board has approved item 7 for consent. - 37- Item V-I.I. PLANNING ITEM # 48283 Upon motion by Council Lady Henley, seconded by Councilman Hamson, City Council APPROVED, CONDITIONED UPON COMPLIANCE, theappllcatlOnofLOPEB. & MERCYPILE and CORNELIUS F., JR. & ANTONIA BOYNTON for the dIScontinuance. closure and abandonment of a portion of Jersey Avenue Application of Lope B & Mercy Pile and Cornellus F, Jr & Antonlna Boynton for the dIScontinuance, closure and abandonment of a potion of Jersey Avenue begznnlng at the south Side of Virginia Beach Boulevard abuthng Lots 1 through 7, Block 25 and Lots 3 and 4, Block 26, Euclld Place Said parcel contains 5,607 square feet DISTRICT 2 - KEMPSVILLE The fo//owlng condlhons sha// be reqUired I The City Attorney's Office WI// make the final detemllnahon regarding ownership of the underlYlngfee The purchase pnce to be paid to the City shall be determined according to the "Poilcy Regarding Purchase of City'S Interest In Streets Pursuant to Street Closures, .. approved by City Council COpies of the policy are available In the Planmng Department 2 The appllcant IS reqUired to resubdlvlde the property and vacate Internal lot lines to Incorporate the closed area mto the adjoining parcels The plat must be submitted and approved for recordatIOn pnor to final street closure approval 3 The appllcant IS reqUired to prOVide a dramage easement to the City o{Vlrgzma Beach over the entire property 4 The appilcant IS reqUired to prOVide an easement to Vlrglma Natural Gas The centerline of the easement wlll be determmed by the actual location of the gas line 5 The appllcant IS reqUired to venfy that no other pnvate utilities exiSt within the nght-of-way proposed for closure Prellmlnary comments from the utilIty compames md,cate that there are no other private utilities wlthm the right-of-way proposed for closure If private utllmes do exISt, easements satlsfactory to the utility company, must be prOVided 6 Closure of the right-of-way sha// be contmgent upon compllance with the above stated conditiOns wlthm 365 days of approval by City CounCil If a// conditiOns noted above are not accomplIShed and a final plat IS not approved wlthm one year of the City Council's vote to close the roadway, thiS approval WI/l be considered nu/l and VOid June 12, 2001 - 38- Item V-I. 1. PLANNING ITEM # 48283 (Continued) Voting 9-0 (By Consent) CouncIl Members Voting Aye Linwood 0 Branch. Ill. Margaret L Eure, William W Hamson, Jr . Barbara M Henley. Reba S McClanan, Robert C MandIgo. Jr. Mayor Meyera E Oberndorf, Nancy K Parker and Rosemary Wilson CounCIL Members Voting Nay None CounCil Members Absent LOUIS R Jones and V,ce Mayor WIllIam D Sessoms, Jr June 12.2001 - 50- Item V-K.1.a. PLANNING ITEM # 52732 Upon motion by Vice Mayor Jones, seconded by Councilman Reeve, City Council ADOPTED an Ordinance upon Application of CORNELIUS F. BOYNTON, JR. & ANTONINA S. BOYNTON for the discontinuance, closure and abandonment of a portion of Jersey Avenue: Ordinance upon Application of Cornelius F. Boynton, Jr. & Antonina S. Boynton for the discontinuance, closure and abandonment of a portion of Jersey Avenue beginning at the northern extremity of Jersey Avenue and running a distance of approximately 157.23 feet in a northerly direction to its intersection with Virginia Beach Boulevard. DISTRICT 2 - KEMPSVILLE The following conditions shall be required 1. The City Attorney's Office will make the final determination regarding ownership of the underlying fee. The City Attorney's Office will review the prior payments made to the City by the applicant to determine ifth(..'Y are in compliance with 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 parcels. The plat must be submitted and approved for recordation prior to final street closure approval. 3. A public drainage easement satisfactory to the Department of Public Work.. shall be provided on the final plat. 4. The applicant is required to verify that no private utilities exist within the right-of-way proposed for closure. Preliminary comments from the utility companies indicate that there are Virginia Natural Gas utilities within the right-of-way proposed for closure. fr private utilities do exist, easements satisfactory to the utility company must be provided. 5. Closure of the right-of way shall be contingent upon compliance with the above stated conditions within 365 days (June 21,2005) of approval by City Council, If the conditions noted above are not accomplished and the final plat is not approved within one year of the City Council vote to close the right-of-way this approval shall be considered null and void. 6. A public utility easement satisJ.'lctory to the Department of Public Utilities will be required to be dedicated on the final plat, June 22. 2004 Item V-K.1.a. PLANNING Voting: - 51 - ITEM # 52732 (Continued) 10-0 (By Consent) Council Members Voting Aye: Harry E. Diezel. Margaret L. Eure, Vice Mayor Louis R. Jones, Richard A. MaddoxI Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf, Jim Reeve, Peter W. Schmidt. Ron A. Villanueva, Rosemary Wilson and James L. Wood Council Members Voting Nay: None Council Members Absent: Reba S. McClanan June 22, 2004 - 39- Item Y.M.l.a/b PLANNING ITEM # 55246 Upon motion by Vice Mayor Jones, seconded by Council Lady Wilson, City Council ADOPTED Ordinances upon applications of CORNELIUS F. AND ANTONINA BOYNTON AND LOPE AND MERCY PILE for the discontinuance. abandonment and closure at Jerrsey Avenue and Virginia Beach Boulevard re reservation for future development Ordinance upon Application of Cornelius F. Boynton, Jr. & Antonina Boynton for the discontinuance, abandonment and closure of a portion of Jersey Avenue beginning on the south side of Virginia Beach Boulevard and extending approximately 155.67 feet in a southerly direction. DISTRICT 2 - KEMPSVILLE The following conditions shall be required: 1. The City Attorney's Office will make thejinal determination regarding ownership of the underlying fee, and will review any prior payments made to the City by the applicants to determine if they are in compliance with 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 shall re-subdivide the property and vacate internal lot lines to incorporate the closed area into the adjoining parcels. The plat must be submitted and approved for recordation prior to final street closure approval. 3. A public drainage easement satisfactory to the Department of Public Works shall be provided on the jinal plat. 4. The applicants shall verify that no private utilities exist within the right-ol-way proposed for closure. Preliminary comments from the utility companies indicate that Virginia Natural Gas has facilities within the right-ol-way proposed for closure. If private utilities do exist, easements satisfactory to the utility company must be provided. 5. Closure of the right-ol-way shall be contingent upon compliance with the above stated conditions within 365 days of approval by City Council (May 22, 2007). If the conditions noted above are not accomplished and the jinal plat is not approved within one year of the City Council vote to close the right-aI-way, this approval shall be considered null and void. AND, Ordinance upon Application of Lope B, Pile & Mercy Pile for the discontinuance, abandonment and closure of a portion of Jersey Avenue beginning on the south side of Virginia Beach Boulevard and extending approximately 107.90 feet in a southerly direction. DISTRICT 2 _ KEMPSVIllE May 23, 2006 - 40- Item V.M.l.a/b PLANNING ITEM # 55246 (Continued) The following conditions shall be required: 1. The City Attorney's Office will make the final determination regarding ownership of the underlyingfee, .and will review any prior payments made to the City by the applicants to determine if they are in compliance with 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 Departmel;t. 2. The applicants shall re-subdivide the property and vacate internal lot lines to incorporate the closed area into the adjoining parcels. The plat must be submitted and approved for recordation prior to final street closure approval. 3. A public drainage easement satisfactory to the Department of Public Works shall be provided on the final plat. 4. The applicants shall verify that no private utilities exist within the right-of way proposed for closure. Preliminary comments from the utility companies indicate that Virginia Natural Gas has facilities within the right-of-way proposed for closure. If private utilities do exist, easements satisfactory to the utility company must be provided. 5. Closure of the right-ofway shall be contingent upon compliance with the above stated conditions within 365 days of approval by City Council (May 22, 2007). If the conditions noted above are not accomplished and the final plat is not approved within one year of the City Council vote to close the right-of way, this approval shall be considered null and void. Voting: 10-0 (By Consent) Council Members Voting Aye: Harry E. Diezel, Robert M Dyer, Vice Mayor Louis R. Jones, Reba S. McClanan, Richard A. Maddox, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf. Jim Reeve, Peter W. Schmidt, Ron A. Villanueva and Rosemary Wilson Council Members Voting Nay: None Council Members Absent: James L. Wood May 23, 2006 Pile Q ~ k~*,~,,~,":~ :d~J ~., \~~ (,:\..",.".,,':~) \~~/;-* o~~;~_,:,;'.t 01'011II.",.'.... CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: An Ordinance extending the date for satisfying conditions in the matter of closing, vacating and discontinuing a 2,512 square-foot portion of that certain street known as Jersey Avenue as shown on that certain plat entitled "EXHIBIT PLAT SHOWING A PORTION OF JERSEY AVENUE TO BE CLOSED ADJACENT TO LOTS 1 THRU 7, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 25 AND LOTS 3 AND 4, BLOCK 26, EUCLID PLACE (M.B. 4, P.63) VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA" MEETING DATE: May 22, 2007 . Background: An Ordinance extending the date for satisfying conditions in the matter of the application of the Lope B. Pile & Mercy Pile (the "Applicant") for the discontinuance, abandonment and closure of a portion of Jersey Avenue beginning on the south side of Virginia Beach Boulevard and extending approximately 107.90 feet in a southerly direction. DISTRICT 2 - KEMPSVILLE . Considerations: The applicant intends to purchase half of the unimproved section of Jersey Avenue adjoining the applicant's property and incorporate it into the applicant's property. In addition to the City Council approval on May 23, 2006, this street closure was previously approved by City Council on June 12, 2001 and again on June 22, 2004. In the earlier cases, however, the applicant failed to follow through on the conditions of closure, and the approvals were voided. All conditions for this street closure have been met, with the exception of the recordation of the final resubdivision plat. The plat has been approved and only needs the signatures of the applicant. However the applicant is in the Philippines at this time and does not plan on returning to Virginia Beach until November 2007. While the plat has been sent to the applicant for their signatures, the extension is needed due to the uncertainty of mail arrival between the United States and the Philippines. The area of the street closure will be incorporated into adjacent properties, and thus improving the desirability of the sites for future commercial redevelopment consistent with the existing zoning of B-2 Community Business District. Pile, Lope B. & Mercy Page 2 of 2 . Recommendations: Staff recommends that an extension of 90 days be granted. . Attachments: Ordinance Staff Review from 2006 Disclosure Statement Location Map Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends approval. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Departmen7)1j City Manager:~ k.., ~~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 AN ORDINANCE EXTENDING THE DATE FOR SATISFYING CONDITIONS IN THE MATTER OF THE CLOSING, VACATING AND DISCONTINUING OF A PORTION OF JERSEY AVENUE, UPON THE APPLICATION OF LOPE B. PILE AND MERCY PILE WHEREAS, on May 23, 2006, the Council of the City of Virginia Beach acted upon the application of the Lope B. Pile and Mercy Pile for the closure of portion of Jersey Avenue; WHEREAS, on May 23, 2006 the Council adopted an Ordinance to close the aforesaid street, subject to certain conditions being met on or before May 22, 2007; and WHEREAS, on April 25, 2007, extension of time to satisfy the aforesaid street closure. the applicants requested an conditions attached to the NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: That the date for meeting conditions of closure as stated in the Ordinance adopted on May 23, 2006, upon application of the Lope B. Pile and Mercy Pile, is extended to August 22, 2007. Adopted by the Virginia, on the Council day of of the City of Virginia Beach, , 2007. CA-10308 V:lapplications\citylawprod\cycom32\ WpdocsID0271POO2\OOO32238.DOC Date: April 27, 2007 R1 APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: !!!f:/t~!':~ffice GPIN: 1467-85-8624-0000 and 1467-85-6657-0000 CORNELIUS & ANTONINA BOYNTON AND LOPE B. & MERCY PILE Agenda Items # 14 & 15 April 11 , 2006 Public Hearing Staff Planner: Stephen J. White REQUEST: 14) Discontinuance, abandonment and closure of a portion of Jersey Avenue beginning on the south side of Virginia Beach Boulevard and extending approximately 155.67 feet in a southerly direction. 15) Discontinuance, abandonment and closure of a portion of Jersey Avenue beginning on the south side of Virginia Beach Boulevard and extending approximately 107.90 feet in a southerly direction. COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT: 2 -- KEMPSVILLE The applicants intend to purchase the two halves of Jersey Avenue to incorporate it into their adjoining properties. SITE SIZE: 8,BQIii €lElMarC feet 2.,5 ,2- ~- 5.(,01- Gf SUMMARY OF REQUEST This street closure was previously approved by City Council on June 12, 2001 and again on June 22, 2004. In both cases, however, the applicants failed to follow-through on the conditions of closure and the approvals were voided. ...._-~, ...--"'" ,.,._-<'....~:, "'.,' :,J,-"<.. ..0" ,'_'U' ,"Co ,.,c. ,,',_, ',' u' "_'<: "C-'" ,', '..,' 0":;"'~ BO~NfoN&eILE'. Agenda 1'~~01s#14>\15 :1 LAND USE AND ZONING INFORMATION SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: South: East: West: . Virginia Beach Boulevard . Jersey Avenue . Pile property / B-2 Community Business District . Auto sales / B-2 Community Business NATURAL RESOURCE AND CULTURAL FEATURES: The area proposed for closure is paved. AICUZ: The site is in an AICUZ of less than 65 dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. IMPACT ON CITY SERVICES WATER: There are no water lines in the area proposed for closure. SEWER: There are no sewer lines in the area proposed for closure. STORMW ATER: There are stormwater drainage facH ities within the area requested for closure. A satisfactory easement must be provided over these facilities. PRIVATE UTILITIES: Virginia Natural Gas has facilities within the area requested for closure. A satisfactory easement over these facilities must be provided. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Comprehensive Plan identifies this site as being in the West Pembroke Strategic Growth Area. This strategic growth area consists of many tracts of land that differ widely with respect to type, intensity, character and value of land use. The West Pembroke Area is located between Witchduck Road, Independence Boulevard, Virginia Beach Boulevard and 1-264. Many of these properties have greater, long-term potential to be transformed from a land use pattern that is predominantly low intensity commercial and industrial to one that achieves a compatible mix of urban land uses and higher economic investment potential than exists today. >,/,-..--., .;,' ".-.,'", ;>j, ";>'.:,::~.:'";,;~;;:,,:::;:-:,,,<:' c'-/ -> '".<>-':<; A",F .. y': ~:" .,' "';:,~" EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION Staff, just as it has twice before, recommends approval of this request. Previous approvals have not been followed-through on by the applicants. It is Staff's sincere hope that this current recommendation for approval will result in the applicants fulfilling the condi tions below and finalizing this closure. The Viewers Committee has determined there is no future need for the right-of-way except for drainage purposes. A satisfactory drainage easement must be provided within this area as a condition of the street closure. The area of the street closure will be incorporated into adjacent properties, and thus improving the desirability of the sites for future commercial redevelopment consistent with the existing zoning of B-2 Community Business District. Staff, therefore, recommends approval of this request with the conditions below. CONDITIONS The following conditions apply to both closure requests: 1. The City Attorney's Office will make the final determination regarding ownership of the underlying fee. The City Attorney's Office will review any prior payments made to the City by the applicants to determine if they are in compliance with 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 shall resubdivide the property and vacate internal lot lines to incorporate the closed area into the adjoining parcels. The plat must be submitted and approved for recordation prior to final street closure approval. 3. A public drainage easement satisfactory to the Department of Public Works shall be provided on the final plat. 4. The applicant shall verify that no private utilities exist within the right-ot-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. 5. Closure of the right-of-way shall be contingent upon compliance with the above stated conditions within 365 days of approval by City Council. If the conditions noted above are not accomplished and the final plat is not approved within one year of the City Council vote to close the right-of-way this approval shall be considered null and void. '- >:,::~-.^~..:-, ~.., :: "., .' "'. ," . ,. ',' .. BQ;~N:fON.&.. Agenda 1'f~rj)s#t4 , /"^ <', '" NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. Plans submitted with this rezoning application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes. The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. >"'.,,>':''"',.'''''''''.., /.':"'''-,: ''', '" ::,,-&~ , '~Sr.'~/i ,'::" ,<~ ,-,:; ", .:' ,;','" ....';...,~" .<, - , ~):';" -':""';'~' .-~~ . Bq~~'TON&ellE Agenda I~~nls# 14 '.~' "'15: , i~ "4. AERIAL OF SITE LOCATION ~ ""'-" 'v. .,.... ,~---,. .... ~"..,~:~' (" BOYNTON & PU:'E ~ . Agenda Items # 14~& 15 , . ' . '.Page5 NOTES: ~"<';<X ,:.., '')\,-'-'"'::.. .: M~'t{iD;t~":~ ~:,~'fJ;~Cr 9,:,:'[[;-: ':.N PL);, "RrCCJR':"; Ej iN- DFEO 8(;.'. ~'4.31. :(!--\(;( ') DCRfl(.t;'- U: .;E'F.5r-.~ 1'\\"E~,i[ TO ~~' C:~()f';tJ.): l?==:-~; oJ. ~wFA Oi-,,~~:RS['f ,A'.'[NUr iO BE C.~OS[O :~ 5...60;"' 'SCVA~~t- : rET/O,,'29 ACRE. 4 HilS PU\~ 'S Nor !I-;;-WDFD ,TO St-;OW ANY t!l.,sLMtNTS Of.; >',WSlCAI. f"EATUPE'S THAT MA'Afn:-::r -'",!S PROP~R"". I 5. nitS PlA; 00"-5 NOT CONST'T'0n:: A ~UE![)I\..~~I.()N ::>f LANO 6. 'jHIS?i.A T "'REPIIRW Wli'liOiJr THE BENEFIT OJ' 1\ Tii~f. REPOP.;. . ~H~ ,. ~ "'N 11.b I cr ':\' ~'s B3'10'34" '1'GIM . ~ -.ft':'/> 29:89' (.s'~4' (~fJ-4 ~ ~ It::) '" ,,'> , LOT 1 '~.t':7:;~~ ~ ~.. ~ ~#' (0,/ c,~o~~~~ i ~ ,,-. --- -.--- --- ---- (J7.~:' ~ J?~~ ~, i LOT 2 ./ --_.- - ~-- --- .,~ ,.OT 3 -- / ;.,/ LOT 4 @ ..... o LOT :i Lor 3 LOT 6 LOT '! 100 FE El SHEET) .,0' SURVEY OF AREA TO BE CLOSED .;;-""'/" > ,:;~:;~>~"< F -,,:.f" " ':'., ) .:;,..::....... .;.,.;.,\' Bq;~N;roNlk Agenda 1!~ms#14 [[] DATE 1 11/13/90 2 06/09/92 3 09/28/99 03/14/00 03/14/00 4 06/12/01 5 07/13/93 6 07/11/88 03/14/95 7 12/12/83 & Pile g STREET CLOSURE I REQUEST Conditional Use Permit (auto sales) Conditional Use Permit (rec vehicle sales and storage) Conditional Use Permit (auto sales) Conditional Use Permit (auto sales expansion) Street Closure (Jersey Avenue) Street Closure (Jersey Avenue) Conditional Use Permit (auto rental) Street Closure (Dorsett Avenue) Conditional Use Permit (auto sales and repair) Conditional Use Permit (auto paint shop) I ACTION Approved Approved Approved Approved Approved Approved Approved Approved Approved Approved ZONING HISTORY '/~'" .',c.;;."'.....',_..,.. ,/..... ,""" ""':"..,:~:;'~'(;,.:;. ":;; .',.-.......: ,,' Bq~N:rON8t~JLE Agenda tt~~$.#J4;f~.i15 , ';~~.~~~.7 NOIIYJI1dtfV mIilS0131IHlIXS }- z w ,~ w S to W ~ :J to 9 o to is ~} :s.. j..t - ':I.~ 0," ~~'~ :: :2-'~ 4) ,;11 8 ~,~ 1:0<: Q.$:.:J It) -- 0 m.9g :!:?"O.~ ~~ af en a.s.S=! u,r=-:> tr~oS :;:) Jo,.._C~, :g 6g~ (i.~.o: c fj)::~,~ Q'1.='~,~ -,-gC)~ ~ ~,,~~ = o*~..~ E .s_ -~:-~- Q!5a15"" ~e~i~ o,Q.(ij J;, '~i !s. ~>'~i~~ 'E 5-'~ 0; o .. c= ,"' -(.) ....Q:l,2 i! -s'~ o - '""'-,0 .23.2-.;; 'lijl~.2' E t~"g -i '-' ::a !'OJ }- Z ll.I :E. ~ ~ (I) 111 a:: :> (I) o ..J U (I) o .~ ?Ii " ~ (S ~ €. ~ .~-' ~.. _ m :5 ~ t a r: E ~ ti ,0 'Q ~ ~ l~f.~ 15 ~'5 ;:; 0] "0 c3~, g~ <<l.;: ~~ S ci: .c ~ 1- ~8 z~ =0 <__~ ,>! t:: ~: .f-e,::::: a:&,~ ~.~ ~-g';g g,:~ ::::.Qs::::: -~~-~._~ e-; a ~ 8 ! -E-~ : E'3'~ ~88:~ ..~ g ,Q r! l~!'~ ~,~:j g ::: a; :::0"":' . ~"O~. g-~8 i_~~ ,~~~ ~-~-~ Eg:~ '~a5 ~'E',3 .2'~~ 'E- 'ii)g ~-~--! ::.('1J'~,.~ ~Ke =fl)a e'~~ ~g.~ g .. l~e~ ~ ~_ e.% <iUS'" I ~.~a': i ~-~~-g_ 7ii,~'?s'O .g ~9 >'" 'Il"-u ~ i.,g I tf ),;;."'Cl 0'< -:5 C Q;,:,,,,, . 9-- .2S?1h i-~'-,-e t Q~-S I ?- ",.5 &':5"0 <" . .:: a.o~ a t. _ ~:_~E$?_ ~'=s -~-~ ~ ,~.-;f:. :,~.~-~- m '0 ~ d'.':2S a.- ~ :;!- i- ~ 's~~-i 5 fE.'~'~ 0._5 .s~:g.!!~' ~-o is';~.9 e ~ .~ ~ ;] i'~,~ .e ~ ~. ,~~,~-s_; =--~.,~~ ~-E: ~~€~~il H~ 5.Z1~ ;;~$ a'~.E -!;~-~~~ 8 ~ o~~'(/j':'g_~";S.!.'-~n 15 g "'a.ill.. ii,g -:O'~ g (p __ ~ 0 $' = ,~ = :,,-e;..J E ~.~ a s'ia5!~ ~ ~.'g ~Q,OOi:iS=.w c-:::~.~-:.~ :ci'::i o~ =~~_~o g ~'0 -e!';6o~.S,~.!ra .gc,~1; ~.'~ a:'J:'iE=,<:2 .,X'o-"";:;~E":o...Q,q; e! o'~1:S~.8:,.-jQ-~U)'..: >.-c;J:,a;-.!'! 'Co)'-,'~."'5:..o .""=t;;os:~,~O"'''''g- E,t.t::::"Clt.Q) 0 a.~' e -.:= ~ ::z: ':-.s'!',=:,a ~'15'-cs..;:-.-"'. . 'aJrt).-=, Q: o:~.-:=. C :c' 5.~ CD g.a:E!,Q eo, a: E' 012,1'.0 ~i~~2:E.:;,.:. .=-~~-.~ ::s <i.'=" 51 E -e'"' ...,'" <:0 ~~'e itft,-s'g: :s,:_,g :g~ s~.. g...... g.,o..!" ~: ~:i "i-~~~,?;' e:e'!~ ~:~: g$ i:c.:,-~:gr--~ ,e.~ . ;; ",.~E S:5-!......,-5i!!j wv ~-=-''E-,&~;o=:.~.,~ c "'- gg.......-ga e::s,;Be ca- e:: ! a'c 'is '0' ~~.s 2''- a. 8 0 1:8 s j ... !" e E ll~ ! ,'" ," I li.5 't I ~ . I I l::: '= I ~ .;> g E .~ ;; a S '0 e. = .9' e 8- 8 .. .... 0'''' :Z:;B .~ '~<g :g'E: =0 0,_ g.j! oE ""0 .~~ ~ ~"e ",;;: "... s:~ u~ ... 0' ~o E! 30 8 ~-i '15 '~-:S'~ ~ ~g_.5 'a:~ 9~'E" =~ ~,'a; a,,~ 8 s~~~~. ~ ffi~~~":~~ za"c :-0.::.0:.0::: ;t ! ~:1?ii OeQ.(t).3:S ~:t',g,~.~~ fij'~'e..E':i :~ t\.~. 28, "" C 0- E'. - "'-cl n:~8g::.Q Q;,€=~:.g-s o tt:r~. 3: ..~ ,~~-'~. ;:,'~- 'tiEE?'t::c= Q .-=-.0. $-'1:: ~>~ "i'sa s ~~:~ &'5' S;:>Il""'$ ~a-5 ..z;: =e g~~~ :J~ u; 5.~ ~~ ,,~j~: ~ g~.g.g' ~ Q-s",.;c. ~ ~2 'gt ~=..S2 d :~E.~',; ~$-&~ . -~' ~1.; -'m i; :.i'~ E i .5 :g g~ ~ ~ 8.g~~13 5~'i-~i i-'Q ~.1:.5 ~~~~~ ~8g, .. .e e. !:"-'~' Q) ';:S2~~ i;.CL 'tJ-o 0 =-~~g. 8 bii:'g-'(i.4- 'E;; {i "O,S!' 2l-g..g-a ~'si &.0 zl!_,~.!~ 0" .."" t= g-:.:; ;;..g . <-~-;: .~'~ -~.4Hg:~~ ,~!,g &.~ 1118 8: -g, {l -u ai' c:;J CIS .-0 I i II , I I I i C ., " !! a " '" -g ~ \;; ... 0"" -2:'_~ ~,.tI) -.~ :20 "" ,;Q,~ ..:l'; ~~ l~ aii ~.~ ~s. 2~ $~ ="5. :10. c= ~.~ ~~ =~ c;~ ~~ .sg ~:e liE i. us i~ pil .". l~ ,.. -.%1 l~ , I ! i_ !? L~ i~ ,~ i~ ~- :: ,~ I~ I~ ;~ 1'; ;3 l~ 1S, 11; I", l~ l II .. ~~ i '<lj lit I r p:'~ II 1 ~.~ , ~ ~'.~ I ! I ~~ ; I Ii ~I !~l ."',1 1 ~ Co. r ;::l ~ :~ t ~_~ -"",~o~,!l' I ~ ; ~ I ~t ~..,. '" ~,.g ~l 'I ~~ ';j 01 I ~".~ ~l <h'" ..11. :1 a I N e 'a~ ~"~ o. .............'~. I, t5 :t I i] I E l~ ;~ II ;; Q. lsi ~;~ !!f;j,? 8 I ~. ;s 'E l5 '" :; c '" fo- o <:~ ~.9 -";; ~;~ ~-fij o.~ ~:6 [-g e ;;; ~8. =8 <: eoc c=> L: '... .:.e:.~ ~~ I,! I <35 .. ! C! _'" !~ i Q. I~ !~ :~ !:~ ,~ Q C NOI1Y:>I1dcIV IDIflS013lHtnIlS U-~I?"~ DISCLOSURE STATEM N6LLVJI'IiW mIIlS0131aOJ;S r ~ !2..Q .. .... 0' i oS Q, 4:)'-Je OlD ! ! o'o~ ~ :2" .=:; .:;: ~'~ ~~8 $ ~ d:>~;'a, ,~:o. 'i,~,'~ I -,0-- :5 = ~ 'g: .0 g:~'.tb .:W' ~ 9 J:-c ~: ~~:g -i-'~ '~.~i.~ tI),~~ .,&.'" 0._ r:: i -$o_~ ~.c'::1i-ii 2: .';"e";j g.~: ~ ,E'o..~ i o:~ 2 E! VA:,';:5 0 B~ ,2":: ~",c i , ~.~-~ ~-.c :: I :c ~ e',!"iif&i=. Q ! :05 ::9 ~ I i 1'.sS g: g~= :Z~~i!~ E "C..'c ~ I Q..e 'is - :cIJ(f1,- ~: G)'Co!! <<Q E 'gE ;f I ~',~3 ~,:!-~~~~ -=';~':"~!'~ (/)Q.,S.-2 I ~-! ~o' tf~.& &:1 !:5-~ ~~:s~ s',?-c , 'soia " .p=,~ .-"000 mo'- ~~,C:0 J ~ ~ IS... ;.s E..:g.!!!g I I e;,g ~~'~,~ I ~~"55~:a-g..!..J ,=,0t;: E~~oai1S~ai~-g 6~~g ~~Q) U) .c:,_ c I I c ""~ hqlCi)='~ c ~, !:(lS 2i,:g~'~- "'''0) - -:J 0 ~,ri:J~.- ~o IlD CD! -5i l -e ~ ~ 'lS ~ g> .2lG~ ..J..;,g: ~ I E "'. fICt -t) tQ j I ~o..'5 c ,gl1!~ ~&ie~]~ z !t'~::l :E GJ.J2":; <= "'0'- 1:> 510 ~ .. .. 2o",i:t !i!-~' ~'!'o' Q J!',.-.g,'Jo ;s.~~ C'.S: ~'G).'C I ~ 0 ~'? >.c=_~.--:.!2 qj "'"' "'8,$"0 g~ 8.i ~ " ~-~~s:: . .;-'; ~,~ .~Q_j_~ ) ~~g~ '" 0,.... '" 1'"15 51:::: '.-:= N <a 2 ~= i , ~~...., I I :~$ g;'l!--~g~ i N (It ,Q.. e-"5 ~'6 S! 1:<, '" c: se .1:c: '" 8 EO ....,. B'"g',e ~ ! 1 j!&~'8' .E,g.E~:e oc Q.' 1&05'" 0'0 ~ c:'" i i ~"'C .:3:.' \1S ,_ e='-,e'~..g..: ~..se ~ f j ,",~ ,Q. '" ~ i,'O:.!!. g.::; 7i.D;,g 0 .g.~ C' O.:;J,_ i ~~'ri ::c~, ~..~ :E>:!;i,.g O":''i' Qf =~-gg, ~ E'-- ~ .2S"~ &.--8,~ ~:5 ~ c.t; I oOCl ~. S '~. 2 Oi:','g 0 2 g,g.:! 1'& &.""_ E-~S 'r:;)U)~-g j O,e- &. ~ ~ e 8'1 ~5!.-i-~ :::i!~Q ; u_ 0 p r;..: j ~z l ~w ! !:E I ,I~" H": Ii I It, ~", 91. ' ilif" I yU, "U>l : l,:O I 'I I I I U I- Z IlJ ::E I1J I- '0(( F (I) IlJ lr ::J 1(1) o .J U U) o --,~ I as Q 'E :;:) ~ ~ Ii if - , E ~ i ~ 'i 1 :;; ~ . i g 1," ~- .~ ll:! 2 '0 I '2 ~~ '0 5/' .'~.. "'-:--. ::: ~,~ E ~ . i - ~ w.lv".> c.e: ;~ ~ l~~ ;;~ gf '~g ..~.;; ~I -1::: 0"0- -== ~ !~~~~ ~ ~ c.Q..Q(J ~ ~'~'::2,~ ~j ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~,:i ~ ~ ~~ o 0__ f~ ~g s~ ;&) i 8~,~ ~1 .~ g'~ ~ :I) !-!~ ~ ~ll f.: ~~ 0. ,3t =: 0",... j .. f ~ I. .~ I~ r~ !~ I '- _0 'B , ~'" i t\l'" t~8 1'S~ ~~ ~~ I ;~ li~ 1 :.~ i:::a. 1:i5- I > ~ ,;~ ~'-:; gj !-0Q. f ~i ! ~.Q < '0 'i ) ~.~ I~&- .. - ~5 I..... I i '- , 0 I' ~ , g l ';j; IE , j -~ ! If ! ~ 1$ !, ; E j~ 1 8 .... i~,g I .,;j .1 -='~ ~o i ~,~~ t __ 4 go! J ~ 2 i=e. ell o,f; ..cc I~~ IS <I; 11 E '" E ~ ~ <5 85 1t~ tU g.. ~ M ~ ~~:'~ '::~ (I) .,:;...0 -..... S ~fl ~ ~ u~ "~r? ~ e S '~.g.j ; ~ ffi ~'~~ ~~ :it ~ t:-.c~ ~ i ~~~.'5 o (> .... o.~..~ i=. ~ j~~s ffia-eEo~ D.~8.8E.2 ~ ~.. Sa-!~ Q..~ ^'-~I" :::::<<;.~,...~ ~..:~~~ .Q= .g>-;:; ]ia13~ ~:;-ge~ ~ ie 6'~ .a :S" 5.5 ~ :~:~8.~ 2 :8:6~-J... (..l::::::>"': ~ 1 t) ='E, ..'" 0'" > .:v ~~ 6'3 If ~~ ~l c: e: f: ~f ./ ;;''2" ~f~ gl~ ~L~ '" .; ~ ~ l '= I "zn 1.5 i ~ _. i ,g. !~ J~ Ie. i .~- E o l:- S ~i~ ~=~ 2' ~~- i~j J ~ $ to .... I~ II' .~.~ i'~ og, ~e IS "0 I /:':;..Q I ~~ J~J I ~ g. I. :; Si c- li!O u e ~ ;;; L" 1$ ,ll !-g l~ r; '", " ; ~ ~g j:...; NOIIV3nddV 31IIlS613l3:tnI1S DISCLOSURE ST A::r?E:J\t1:eJT". "'::::""",-,,,, "<:C,>",. ," "",,"--',,:' 'r:--:;::~'<~';;:< .'Y"':' BO~N"ON&aILE Agenda i~~ri1S#14''''lS Item #14 & 15 Boynton & Pile Discontinuance, abandonment and closure of a portion of Jersey Avenue beginning on the south side of Virginia Beach Boulevard and extending approximately 155.67 feet in a southerly Direction Discontinuance, abandonment and closure of a portion of Jersey Avenue beginning on the south side of Virginia Beach Boulevard and extending approximately 107.90 feet in a southerly Direction District 2 Kempsville April 12,2006 CONSENT Barry Knight: Our next two items to be placed on consent agenda are Items #14 and 15, Boynton and Pile. An Ordinance upon Application of Cornelius F. Boynton, Jr. and Antonina Boynton for the discontinuance, closure and abandonment of a portion of Jersey Avenue beginning on the south side of Virginia Beach Boulevard and extending approximately 155.67 feet in a southerly direction, and an Ordinance upon Application of Lope B. Pile and Mercy Pile for the discontinuance, closure and abandonment of a portion of Jersey Avenue beginning on the south side of Virginia Beach Boulevard and extending approximately 107.90 feet in a southerly direction in the Kempsville District with five conditions. Eddie Bourdon: Mr. Chairman, again, Eddie Bourdon for the record. We are in accord with all the conditions and I ensure the Commission that this street closure will not come back again. It will be finalized. Barry Knight: Thank you. Eddie Bourdon: Thank you very much. Barry Knight: We've seen it about three times before. Anyone present today that objects to putting agenda Item # 14 & 15 on the consent agenda? If not, Mr. Livas. Henry Livas: This request is a closure of a portion of Jersey Avenue at the south side of Virginia Beach Boulevard, and the applicants intend to purchase the two halves of Jersey Avenue to incorporate it into their adjoining properties. As far as the background is concerned, you may have just heard that the street closure was previously approved by City Council on June 12,2001 and also on June 22,2004. However, in both cases the applicants failed to follow through on the conditions of closure and the approvals were subsequently voided. We recommend that this closure be approved since there is no need Item #14 & 15 Boynton & Pile Page 2 for the right -of-way except for drainage. We also recommend approval of the request along with five conditions. One of the conditions would address the drainage issue. Therefore, we put this on the consent agenda. Barry Knight: Thank you Henry. Do I hear a motion? There is a motion to approve by Kathy Katsias. Ronald Ripley: Second. Barry Knight: A second by Ron Ripley. Any discussion? Call for the question. ANDERSON BERNAS CRABTREE HENLEY KATSIAS KNIGHT LIVAS RIPLEY STRANGE WALLER WOOD AYES NOO ABSO ABSENT 3 ABSENT AYE AYE AYE AYE AYE AYE AYE AYE ABSENT ABSENT Ed Weeden: By a vote of 8-0, the Board has approved Items #14 & 15 for consent. .L:../\.rUDll A. '. MERiDiNJ SOURcE BASlO ON Pl. ~EC!JR[lED IN ot::ED BOOK 2431, P,<\GE 15, 2, PORTiON OF JE RS[r AVII'JU;: TO. ',. GLGSE.D: L::~-~~'2L~3 ' .3 AREA OF ,JU:SE:Y A VE"'JU[ TO BE. ClOSfD -=: 5,607 SQUARE FE.ET /0.129 ACRE: 4, THIS p;.A T :-:; NOT INTUW[D TO SHON .t.Nr C,t.,SEM[NTS OR PHYSICAL FEATURES rHA T MAt' AfF leT :HIS PROPERrr, J. n-i!3 ?U\.'f DOCS N, or COWmTUTE 1\ SUBDIVISiO~; or :_.4ND. j 6. ,HIS P!.A T ?RF.PA/~[J 'I/'TH'::n..'T :'~'F BF Nf'Yi T OF .-\ nT:...E REPORT. j \/;)H r k Pil\;,. . OLD l11?, fl g .(;{ '(,. S 83"0'34" t NAiL r", q,1\1/. .' r. ,e>. J ~. 2989' -....:::;. "'1:. ~ '-i b ~ ~ ~.. <J~.I,~~" . '" 3, S tS -'~f~jd~tr/~~~-4CjJ III S Q elL;) LOT! '..90' o;!",J<t. -. 1 Y-1r c 11?'7 ~ I ~O~ i)RILL . '<1~ () 01. ^ t:Jr:, '07> Ol'k" ~ -, f I.S '-, 'ro.;J' 'I')' tr v, ; ~ a: '<.' ~OLE_.___._. ---'-'-- --... -"--. ~}<l3fO~ ~~ o:;;~ ~Jj>D 1 g ~ /... .,..., ../' ,/~ /' .." .../" ~ ..' ,./' . "! // ~ ,/' ~, ..,/ t::r / ~ .' .IL. ~ .,' / /' w/. w / lY. 1').0 /0::: / , <( /:- 01.' <( / t-../6/~r< 6 /' ~/ (fl" 0 ~ /(fl /:;: ~ .'10 ,;0 // N/ ~ ;",./ ~/" z ~ /:'l ./ ri / /' N / lIJo .......... . /' "--'/ 0 ./ /' ./' ./'0 /./ // // (fl / ./ / /,/ ,/ / z./ , , ~/ /. // / /~ / / Q.~ '::=25.36' t:I LOT 4 R = 38.0r A = 108'01'12" -? '- A = 71.64' '" J: T = 52.32' Ql C "" 61.49' . 0 CB = S 53'45'41" W 0_ LOT 2 ,~,. / /' / / LOT .3 - ---- -.----- -----..- --.----.-- ---- LOT 4 (f~5"~, \\;d/ LOT 5 r. L~ :;: ____ .lO____ <0 , I ul th ;.0 co "v I . ,- "'. 0 ~ 0 ._z-- 0:. '.:) / ./ ~OT 6 ./.. I 1\ 'T "7 LV I I S 89.45'05" W w......... =>Z 00 Z a:: 10 LUJ:p;)~ > I- (Q u.: <9 3i a: ;::i >-~+~ ~ ~ o:i o:i a:::~~ci w>'-''-' ~....... L.C~T 8. BLDCK 25, EUCliD PLi\CE (M.a. 4, P. 63) {;Plt\j i467R-8::.-6427 "1 (0 .n EXHIBIT PLAT SHOWING A. PORTiON OF JERSEY AVENUE TO BE CLOSED A.DJA.CENT 'TO LOTS 1 THRU 7, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 25 AND LOTS 3 AND 4, BLOCK 26, EUCLID PLACE (f.1.E}. 4, P oj) VIHGIN't, !3E ACH. \lif~I.,iN:A SCALE: ; ""'25' AUGUST .3, 1999 JOHN E. SIRINE AND ASSOCIATES, LTD. SURVElORS. t::NGINrTRS. PLANNERS 4317 BONNEY ROA.D V:RG!Ni,<\ i3E ACH, VIRGINiA 23452 SO 15 1QO -1;-'--'--- "- ~~,.....J, ~ ~~~"'~ ..-.-....::'.j GRAPHIC SCALE ?--;..------~l. EW~ED: NOv. 12, 1999 w::: <=: ..,,, 1: r"':\___ ",....c """"""' e ~ N co co I to ~ LOT 3 t-- 1.0 ~ !.{) ~- o .J lO ' I- o -.J to '<t ('.J LLl._ ~ ::<:: u I') IX) u -<<.0 I O-.J ,IL) Q Q. IX) -.J I CD Cl -or- 1"- - <0 - J ' -or 1'. () al r- f-- -~)::::; z o LLJ-'" ~.: _J l.~ FEU SHEET 1 OF Pile g STREET CLOSURE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: An Ordinance extending the date for satisfying conditions in the matter of closing, vacating and discontinuing a 3,095 square-foot portion of that certain street known as Jersey Avenue as shown on that certain plat entitled "EXHIBIT PLAT SHOWING A PORTION OF JERSEY AVENUE TO BE CLOSED ADJACENT TO LOTS 1 THRU 7, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 25 AND LOTS 3 AND 4, BLOCK 26, EUCLID PLACE (M.B. 4, P.63) VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA" MEETING DATE: May 22, 2007 . Background: An Ordinance extending the date for satisfying conditions in the matter of the application of the Cornelius F. Boynton, Jr. and Antonia S. Boynton (the "Applicant") for the discontinuance, abandonment and closure of a portion of Jersey Avenue beginning on the south side of Virginia Beach Boulevard and extending approximately 107.90 feet in a southerly direction. DISTRICT 2- KEMPSVILLE . Considerations: The applicant intends to purchase half of the unimproved section of Jersey Avenue adjoining the applicant's property and incorporate it into the applicant's property. In addition to the City Council approval on May 23, 2006, this street closure was previously approved by City Council on June 12, 2001 and again on June 22, 2004. In the earlier cases, however, the applicant failed to follow through on the conditions of closure, and the approvals were voided. All conditions for this street closure have been met, with the exception of the recordation of the final resubdivision plat. The plat has been approved and only needs the signatures of the adjoining property owners, Lope B. Pile and Mercy Pile. The Piles are in the Philippines at this time and do not plan on returning to Virginia Beach until November 2007. While the plat has been sent to the Piles for their signatures, the extension is needed due to the uncertainty of mail arrival between the United States and the Philippines. The area of the street closure will be incorporated into adjacent properties, and thus improving the desirability of the sites for future commercial redevelopment consistent with the existing zoning of B-2 Community Business District. Boynton, Cornelius F., Jr., and Antonia Page 2 of 2 . Recommendations: Staff recommends that an extension of 90 days be granted. . Attachments: Ordinance Staff Review from 2006 Disclosure Statement Location Map Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends approval. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Departmenrt!V City Manager: ~ \L:(yglr"i 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 AN ORDINANCE EXTENDING THE DATE FOR SATISFYING CONDITIONS IN THE MATTER OF THE CLOSING, VACATING AND DISCONTINUING OF A PORTION OF JERSEY AVENUE, UPON THE APPLICATION OF CORNELIUS F. BOYNTON, JR. AND ANTONIA S. BOYNTON WHEREAS, on May 23, 2006, the Council of the City of Virginia Beach acted upon the application of the Cornelius F. Boynton, Jr. and Antonia Boynton for the closure of portion of Jersey Avenue; WHEREAS, on May 23, 2006 the Council adopted an Ordinance to close the aforesaid street, subject to certain conditions being met on or before May 22, 2007; and WHEREAS, on April 25, 2007, extension of time to satisfy the aforesaid street closure. the applicants requested an condi tions attached to the NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA: That the date for the Ordinance adopted Cornelius F. Boynton, August 22, 2007. meeting conditions of closure as stated in on May 23, 2006, upon application of the Jr. and Antonia Boynton, is extended to Adopted by the Virginia, on the Council day of of the City of Virginia Beach, , 2007. CA-10309 V:lapplications\citylawprod\cycom32\ Wpdocs\D027\POO2\OOO32252.DOC Date: April 27, 2007 R1 TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: Wt{fi, tj. vt//ttI-hvv City Attorney's Office GPIN: 1467-85-8624-0000 and 1467-85-6657-0000 CORNELIUS & ANTONINA BOYNTON AND LOPE B. & MERCY PILE Agenda Items # 14 & 15 April 11 , 2006 Public Hearing Staff Planner: Stephen J. White REQUEST: 14) Discontinuance, abandonment and closure of a portion of Jersey Avenue beginning on the south side of Virginia Beach Boulevard and extending approximately 155.67 feet in a southerly direction. 15) Discontinuance, abandonment and closure of a portion of JerseyAvenue beginning on the south side of Virginia Beach Boulevard and extending approximately 107.90 feet in a southerly direction. COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT: 2 -- KEMPSVILLE SITE SIZE: 3,095 square feet T okJ SI1l:.. 6, flQ:}- 5t The applicants intend to purchase the two halves of Jersey Avenue to incorporate it into their adjoining properties. SUMMARY OF REQUEST This street closure was previously approved by City Council on June 12, 2001 and again on June 22, 2004. In both cases, however, the applicants failed to follow-through on the conditions of closure and the approvals were voided. '-"',.,:~;-'::"': - '~ ,,~ .~ :~;<'-~''<:''" ~ ' -';";:':'-~~h ,;:'~ ,'" "",: " ~.:'.:' ~ ,- ';~." ,,- '/' ':'.., ;::: _:~, :~;'>;,;>-7:7<'~' . "">~ '; BO~NrON & Agenda J!~rits# 14 <''''':.': LAND USE AND ZONING INFORMATION SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: South: East: West: . Virginia Beach Boulevard . Jersey Avenue . Pile property / B-2 Community Business District . Auto sales / B-2 Community Business NATURAL RESOURCE AND CULTURAL FEATURES: The area proposed for closure is paved. AICUZ: The site is in an AICUZ of less than 65 dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. IMPACT ON CITY SERVICES WATER: There are no water lines in the area proposed for closure. SEWER: There are no sewer lines in the area proposed for closure. STORMWATER: There are stormwater drainage facil ities within the area requested for closure. A satisfactory easement must be provided over these facilities. PRIVATE UTILITIES: Virginia Natural Gas has facilities within the area requested for closure. A satisfactory easement over these facilities must be provided. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Comprehensive Plan identifies this site as being in the West Pembroke Strategic Growth Area. This strategic growth area consists of many tracts of land that differ widely with respect to type, intensity, character and value of land use. The West Pembroke Area is located between Witchduck Road, Independence Boulevard, Virginia Beach Boulevard and 1-264. Many of these properties have greater, long-term potential to be transformed from a land use pattern that is predominantly low intensity commercial and industrial to one that achieves a compatible mix of urban land uses and higher economic investment potential than exists today. ..,~,,/, ".-' ~>->; ,::-., ;/",,- .". --, "'_"'c': ."j.F~,,<:; ,.:..:-' .....,,-. --- ",.', ",,',/~.-':~ _'d_ ',"'. _.:-'-".O,'_i BO'lN:tC)t~& Agenda rt~r6s#14 EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION Staff, just as it has twice before, recommends approval of this request. Previous approvals have not been followed-through on by the applicants. It is Staff's sincere hope that this current recommendation for approval will result in the applicants fulfilling the cond itions below and finalizing this closure. The Viewers Committee has determined there is no future need for the right-of-way except for drainage purposes. A satisfactory drainage easement must be provided within this area as a condition of the street closure. The area of the street closure will be incorporated into C3,djacent properties, and thus improving the desirability of the sites for future commercial redevelopment consistent with the existing zoning of B-2 Community Business District. Staff, therefore, recommends approval of this request with the conditions below. CONDITIONS The following conditions apply to both closure requests: 1. The City Attorney's Office will make the final determination regarding ownership of the underlying fee. The City Attorney's Office will review any prior payments made to the City by the applicants to determine if they are in compliance with 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 shall resubdivide the property and vacate internal lot lines to incorporate the closed area into the adjoining parcels. The plat must be submitted and approved for recordation prior to final street closure approval. 3. A public drainage easement satisfactory to the Department of Public Works shall be provided on the final plat. 4. The applicant shall verify that no private utilities exist within the right-of-way proposed for closure. Preliminary comments from the utility companies indicate that there are no private utilities within the right-of-way proposed for closure. If private utilities do exist, easements satisfactory to the utility company, must be provided. 5. Closure of the right-of-way shall be contingent upon compliance with the above stated conditions within 365 days of approval by City Council. If the conditions noted above are not accomplished and the final plat is not approved within one year of the City Council vote to close the right-of-way this approval shall be considered null and void. ;:"'<''-:'::>'"'-::';''' .,. ....:':, \; ~~ ,.; , BOYNTON & PILE Agenda Items # 14.. .15 e3 NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. Plans submitted with this rezoning application msy require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes. The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. . .>"'..;"-,.;" ->->,~., '0',.";")'" .,.;' >J.(::,_;: .::__', ,';- , ~,' '.,< Bq~N[ON8t Agenda 1!~ri1$AJ14 AERIAL OF SITE LOCAJlON .,N_;, "___"__; "~:.3 {;,<.::'__: "---> , .,' '/'-"'/'< , -'- . ,.... . -..' ,'.c.,..;.-....,: .,...... .;.....'. Bq~N-rON&~ILE . Agenda It~n,s# 14/t5 5 NOTES: M~,{;D;~..'~' ~~'J};;CF Sf,SED '~,N p~,~, r' RetOR:"iE-t) iN DfEO g..).'. ?431. :c't~C( 1581 Dc~~ri('t;o.. 07 .;U~~f.~' ,\\'EN'JE 1"G gf c:.:;rSE.D: [::~):'" '..~-2-~J oJ. ~RE" Of -'ER~E1 AvE~.Ur :0 8E (,L()S[D" 5,.607 SCUAR~ : Tl'/O,129 ACRE. 4 ,HIS Pl.'; T 's 'lor !h ;tj,OFD iO St-;OW ANY E,ASLM!.'fHS QR ~HYSlCAl rEA TURES 'Tp.AT MAyAF!'TGf lHlS PROPER?:'. I 5. TIilS PLJI,; DOES NOT CONST'TJ1'E A sueOlvS,;ON ()f LAND. o.THiS PiP "'REPAREIJ W!iHO<Jr THE BENEFIT Of A TiT~f. RE?OfF , './~;~." ,I~ , ~ ,N Gt.C "-/1i', g :'{' 't.s 83'10'.5<r t NAil ~4z ~ ..j':' (l'~ l!/r._ ~ ; ~ ~,:>" '\,~" '~'"c;/?/"I~~r,. ~ J:::. () OlD LOT 1 ~'I "'-l~~- i:" IM.. ' ~~ DRill. {D.g'- c ,Ql?a,~r.y~_ 'I '..0 HO'..:E . ~ 'SO;~Cr 'T/1j;,'"<:~.b... ! Q:'~. ---. _._-- --- -- 1J:7.;:'~ ;; /?/Jt. ao.~ "T(}' ~ LeT 2 / /' ,-OT 3 ;., N ~ II) OlD PIN @ .... II)~ --- --._.- .----- - - :&----;- , It) It) It) <D . I r .... 0 ~. 0 z LO" 4 e LOT :; ... '" co II) , 10, <j> LOT 3 .... co ~ ----- - LOT 6 4 SLOCK 25. EUCliD PLACE (IiHI. ,4, p, 63) ,', ' ' GPIN 1467-85-6427 t.LI~ ~. , ::>, . co ~"O:: It), -,'- . ..-~i::......,r- ,':', ...:,~..f'I")"". , "<o~ ~ ':. ~.~.~.~ .. LL1_" . . .... CI)',;:"'l1l.m EXHIB.itp1:ATsHOWlt'lG '.'. J1:;~~e. T1ON"'pi'.' '.,. . .!"!J ~ "TG:? BE':'CLOSED . BLOCK . Z~ AND .'EUCLlD PLACE ) . VIRGIN'" ,'. . 'AUGuSTS. , " , '0. ASS66.AlEs. l TO. INEERS .Pt,ANNERS BONl"E't '.' RbAD, ;IRC,N;l, .BEACK. Vl~Cl'lIA .2.3452. ..25. ..50.,j~:;' "100FEEl RE. of.SED: NOY, 1 ~.i 999' ~RApHIC $C;ALL . ' ,- -; . ,.--~..-, ;,'~' SHEET.:10f 1: SURVEY OF AREA TO BE CLO~~D ;-"',,' -, '.',.' ',.,~" " ~ .'v. ,_:<, .< Bq~!'JJO~~~JLE Agenda Ite.l1ls#..t4,.~15 ~~g~() & Pile g [[I DATE 1 11/13/90 2 06/09/92 3 09/28/99 03/14/00 03/14/00 4 06/12/01 5 07/13/93 6 07/11/88 03/14/95 7 12/12/83 I ACTION Approved Approved Approved Approved Approved Approved Approved Approved Approved Approved I REQUEST Conditional Use Permit (auto sales) Conditional Use Permit (rec vehicle sales and storage) Conditional Use Permit (auto sales) Conditional Use Permit (auto sales expansion) Street Closure (Jersey Avenue) Street Closure (Jersey Avenue) Conditional Use Permit (auto rental) Street Closure (Dorsett Avenue) Conditional Use Permit (auto sales and repair) Conditional Use Permit (auto paint shop) ZONING HISTORY ;,,,,-_/,,.;, . ;,"../ ":_'~ , ""~';.::--;:,,:- -;- Bq~Njf6N8t~'LI:' --. Agenda Il~rh$#t4.IJ5 "C>. ., ...'. "~~9~7 N()IIVJIlddV 31flS0131HtlIIS li .~ . " ,; !!! ~ E :g.~g'~ '0 '" o-,15.~ a Z; '0-;C ~-_ g ~':~ c ."" " '" a;o :6. d ~ -g'~ ~~"gr.: '".:;.:g ~ ~,~'~ i_~.~ ~'~ ~:a~'~ a.~ :~, i:~ q)O'~ is ~l" o':=~-$O ....-.i:.~.==: Q,',:) ~ ~~ '~8E ci::.~:e~ i. ~-'a,.s gi~ ~ "'<::" o=~ ~ i-g-~] a-~~ e. ~ ~ :1)......0 ~:6'~ 0.98 c ~u ;c -; = o::~ Q.$: -~}-.~ ,g. ~ 'B ~ ~~_~..9 ~ 5~::.~.g: r.n .a.:g] ~EL3 Qi's""=<>o;l!al,,,,,, 2:>- ~,~ -;> .E 5?] ;; ~-~ ~':.5 -~fe'~E,~ 9 OQ (ij -a.o '0) 0:= ~ uJ -~! o,g; 3 ::l 0 ,,<<> (D 0 0 ~ a Q) ~ ~ 7ii: .g 0: :; .3 (f.l 3"E ... Q>-- 0 '" ,.au ~,40_.;rJ eg':...-~-!E:'(j)-5 Oai_-o ~'~oa ~ ~'iii c: C' C 1;1) c "::.- ~ .:; c, ~-i:g~ c::: Q....~ ~!'!5'.m g,i.],l<5': ="0<:1: ~-S~',vJ,,~ cOt/) 0~..oCl-__'at:DO. .,w~ E 'a. S s ~=ii o'E'~~'~(i) <(....5 ~ '" ~ag . ;: ~= <:: " B os c: c;. '" c. z'" -'2 '" sa o-=:; c;:;.C5- e:',~ ~ ~ ~,.~ ~ ~, ~~,~~ e..... e m..c: .s''S''u (> '~' " ~ E.~_~~,= ,2 0, 8.<? .=:-2-= E~~.<t,:o ~:'"S'.r3S Q::J:g.;:tJ<...... (i->'-- ~ :':-,05 0 IS_Q 0 c:~' ~.!et"') O',.Q Q.'r;) ~ ~~8~ C,ci_ OtO co 0-- -:::;: ~ < 0:2-<<'.= I ;~.~.~ ::i: ~.5.!=5 Eo ,Ol.~~ l;! <>. '" ii to Ill) --='~.o,e;:.. 0; c: ,. ... .!!!~=o~ $I g.3g::,s g, (; e ::. ..."" (r -g .!. .s -= ;; j; c: 0 c __ CJ ~. o..:;:.~ i.i..g)',~ ~~aO (;,l)CG-i:i.O~-:eow.c: '8 :0,,8.. .g~9~ 5!:Eu~,5 :;; C c: at)" a,g~ : -*'gt .;' -g ?:~ g .. *3 e ~ ~ 1.. u -.0..2 ;;;.s!~_o"C~1!O g,.,> ~~'~:.; -'.: ~ <> ~~&~ E:2 - e e..5 ' 7..: .....::2,.: <-_~ ~$'!E~ ii lIJ:J: ~-.~-1i gS2~ ?-.~ ~~ .~ ::: t; -2:-c: E:5, ~ <l>', o',~. 0: =ug~ ... :e~'Eg,.g,o~.-E. ~,o~ "S--5!!.':'=S I -g$ c:,~ '" ".0;;'3 '" co. ".- E <;; ;.ro~ ~...5 2'E CD>a Co 0 ;a: g.,Ss ::i !! a"iij 8:50 [8gsg.5.,}~.! E:~ -. n' 'it }- Z 41 ~ 111 ~ Iii w 0:: ::> (I) o ..J U (I) i5 !z IJJ ~ ~ ~ (/) .LL1 a:: :> to o ..J U to o '5 Q 8- (; ,~ '5 ] '5 -5 .; uJ-',0 a;l? ::;)-.-~ ~ ~:,~ '0 de ~~ en .~ ~ ~ E ~ t:~ !-J: g6 2'~ = '" <-C) >0.'0::: (J:e .,.-~~ .::;:1S~~~ t\. "'1:~- ~<::'gg~ ;g,E .:;!;:: ~~-~-~ e.; g- > ~_:€ 'E'~ f;.fr.2 .:: li}~ a...<<; .... t: ~~'ti;; 9 ~::i 0.. ::::::00 :::::-0""; ,; <> Q i E: ~ f I ~ i I ~ I II I Illl ~ 1 ~ o"=' [' nJ I 1111 ;1 ',,!~ I , d~ ~! i ' ~,~ ~l !; @: ~ i r ;J ':.1 I ~1 ~! - ='~ ~ll H ~l .~~ "'I I ~}~ ~l 'I ~.~ 3'1 j :J 0 I ! ~ i ~ !~ j .; I !l Ii i-i !"t'; I~ Ii ,g 8 " 1-' ~,g ,!!.g eii ~a "'- o.~ ;E -5 ,~ _.~ Oe .,~ ~'e ,.'" U'\Oo .,gl 0'0 ~ Ci,; i .. c "" 'Eo t& .g~ 8 ~,~ ~, u,a:'Q'.Q) = a: E~ "'" ~g_.s EB -9~,~ ,~~ g '~,~_~a:,~' _.~ ciS c. ~ Q~:;,,~O.=: cc~"} -_ie s:; '- ~i-!'s.~~ ~~~~'g'5 o .~ .C:.s,g: ~ ~-~5..2=:~ 0:: Q::.::: c.:& .w-,~a-5 ~.~ ~~~~'~>~ a:-o=C.o ~~~-~ ~-a ::'.!l ,~'~: '~ ;~a-~;: ~ i ~5~:'~ I.C a "0 'S- fa ~ ~ ~'~ ~ ~ 6" &,~: ; i!l~ g ,~,~ .S 0 "< E C~{.:E ~ ~ ~ ::':S.J:. 0': o ~ ,s..;. Q. s.~..E '~ ,~~~~- .6g~~_g j i'8.-a ! _ O:'~ $3,.C i-S':; =! ~~a ~~ ggci:ig .~E-.g [-2 g g g ~.~ e '0 ~.j:; 6 .9-,3'.g = :S8a"'.e o ! ''-'~ a. '" st.9 -,;: ~K"lO,a~ =~~s.8 ~~].~ : !-;; g ~~e - j a'~g z e'~ .e ~ 9-g~':a ~=-.:: ;.' 5- ~ ~::8 :~<~ j::: l!!~K=> ffigi2~ -U <<f.l:1 =:0 . I " .. .. <: a " .., '" .. ~ :;; ... ~o~ ~~ j .;!1;j :g'.Q .. " DOl ~"lO:: ~'~ ~-"?i i~ Q~ lS- ~~ g:,2 :'"5. "'" " " > " != i i , Ie l:;:) i~ !JI !:~ r~ ~ .~ !~ ltt 19 i~ Is I E I"" Ii? !~ ~€ la I c~ : ,9 !e . c la I ~ I~ l~g !....~ I"'" i~,"~ ~ C:Q ~ ~-Q !0 I &''g lQ I e 0; I~ ! ~~ i~. I i:f it' I ~ 0 . ~ I 0-5 !;; ! ,.g: 1~! I U:o il:'o ~ a ~ ! f;; L~ ~a I~ ~s- ~,; 101 .= ~'5 i:;;.. ~o I~ Ie bW (,~ !t it ~ ,~ ~ "~ In ~l~- i '" 'll i3 E e '" .~ '0 ~ n S~ ;~ "0 5:.= 0..~ ~'2 i,~ N ...""..:.,..... NOI1V:>I1dlV ffiIUS01J lHffiIlS *~~ -};:~::: ~-~~ ,~li i ; 6 .~ ~ ~ DISCLOSURE STATEMENT,.",.., /"'-".' c_;<~; , --,.-~:>~' ..' "-', r, BO~N!ON"..&,...~~.LE Agenda 1~~l'tls#14~~,;15 , ~.~g~8 NQLtVOI'IddVWIlS0131aDI1S 1k i$! r~1 I:E :'l.1J h.. ~~ ~oo p~ I I.~ . 00' m\ ~gl ! $' lut i ,(I) I ! 01 l I i I U -~ 0<:> .c e,~ .~-~'~ ..> 8-~.~ 'e., E "'5 " ;38 :2,"O~ e~ i {/)c.,5 .10 w~::~ ~~g ~ (1)0",- o .~.Q-5 6 d~.; !!. ~ ~':S Q.::::-"'..23 ..J;~811l ~'o ',.,.- tft: ~iH ~ ~ .....s ~'CD; C' 0" ~ 't:: t;:t: Q.Q8,;;;;;; .0< ~K-!~ fR- ,~o ~!'~~ e Z,~-::l E5-.Il <; 8e~g <:::l!"~ ~.-=;; m o ..... {4 ~ 0-;::3,_ ~i~j '0tO~"g ::J!CJQ 'E it w Q - <;; ~ E l:l t! '" $ .g o 0 ..c E ~ i o 8 !". C. -~ g; c a'~ ~" 0.5 '0 e ..J a ~~ ~ uE EC' Q IJ}.'= = 11~:Q Od: c~ ...~ ~g ~ e",,, t:l ~ .....~ ~ i ~i~ Q.~~~~ <.g3:e~ ~'o_ oS ~;-~ ;i 8]2-E~ ; E5~ ~~g~ ~g:~ !l~~ ~. ~-: 0- ::0.,... i .! ,~Q OO~ ,i,. ~.1:u ih li>[ .. 0;05 ! 1:("&:),~ 'I CD ="~ 1'~'~<3' ; tt,..::D 'a r! ~.g.9 <::- I ~'.~'g !,~; I '~~i5 I ~~lR "!OtO E~.. I ~UJ_c_,. .z::",i- '"i"O I ~ 0 io; , ,iboC"i l!! <; (,) '" ~.g2: '06~-g'g i ~,s'.i~ , ::)~o = ; 2 g<;>. i ,~"~ ~'Ji !:&'~;.!! 1'; 'is-,a,e i ~g~ i, 8.~:S ~ 5 i ~l 'lll ~I ~I ,;( ....~ '" >" 01 "'I :':1 ~I =l ",1 0' f,J1 i " '" '" l: .~ .5 '" '" ~ 'E - O~ -~-~ tIl'" .- .. 3/., 0';,,) .0'" " " 1~ e~ 2.'5 ~..s O~ ~.~ -c: i.@ ~8: '" '" >:J Q~ .z::- _-..c S'j i.~ ~~ .~~ ;::;:''"5 .,~ E~ -';';: ~C :::io I j i II i ,i I I li If! E ! I j ! j i ( , ! l ! I i . ., -'~ ~~--~ ~ ,~ " ! ~~{&i,' .,g'''5 :: t; i,'gjg.Q:':~fJ) w-:g 0 ~ = g, :5_-g ~$ 'g.~ ~:,:a ~ '~~i g~~_e ~ ~- m:8 ci= 2.~ .~_5 0 D,~ ~_ 1: "E C. ,c)'--1:f Ce ;> ~ Q C .,,~ 80';;: :~,s",,,, ~ g :l..,s e' "': tDfii ~E ~ 'g! -s go ~ 00 51'~ ... g:-;:S::;~: !l'l:! :!''S ." ~ ., ~ ~o u;...,Q ~., ::: :5',C) .. ~.=->. ,..'.-ceS!.o'- '~~6sg.sE,,==c!!3 m 0 tl)i'=:~ i ~~ !.s "C~'(D..... C':: Q:; 0 0:" -~gll19 "',s- \?,s e a.~.! o.tS. a~,i-l..o : fii~;,oo!o-;;;g>.2"i g $:>5 ri .. E'eCl.E'~:n ;S',5 C::;> ~.. l';' .8" ~:~',,:.'~: ,j,':!" 8 ',~ ~~. ~ ~!,s~~>~~ <> "''&'.;;:1 '2--:5 :.~': O'5.~"'~'~'C( GJ.e.,lO C ~ '.J: C 5:-, fj_c:J::= C"!! ::Ii f=-a,g" ll>:,i'" Gl e se Z :: Gl <5 E <>Gl"" .s,gSco'C "''' jSe,s" ~,:I~.8~_g ~:,~~-'g-":i-8 _ .~C? ~ (l;I go -= ~ ,CD '0 ~ .,'<> ,"", 1> to ._,_~ ~--'~-~,":'c; S~:: g ~Q.,ti -.0' .-:iCJ;.""tt AI .~_:::J. ~_ < ~ :> C>>,., E .. - "', .., "'iii,' ~. 0.5::,= 0' -.a~~:s :; .~ 5.!! ~g,fS, f'I_~i'e 5-;-:! ..g,gs 0-g~5~~E Q..u 0 =- u,____ .............--. .; .8 E ~ ~. '" <:: 't: 0. C .2 e 8. 8 " f~. ' I, !:E:,g ~.~ ice; !:'G.C) J~.O < g.!~ oE ,:Ee- ! ~~ .r:: tx:J ! ~ c It3E IE) ,g " -<0"'" ~~ tu is' g 0: E'- 'is JC~ 0>; (i ~ ~~E rl ~& O>~.~ E:~.~~~ ;g, ,,';to.$!-5:-:; w~~gs~~ i ~ IS~ ] -S Oo-.Q..o~~ ~;~~!~S. ffi%=g2?i ~~~u.g~ a:::~' '0 C =..c .inu ~ ~~,e~ s t'E ;- u; ~~~:S~ ~~g~g 8;'~~ , ~.~ ~i .S: 0 c; ~ . ~~ ~i nc~-O'= ~l 0-'-0. a;-~ :3:,~'.g0 c> . t i~~~.: ~f ....~a;:o (;,) ::q.o 'iQ".'=M!. ....>~~ ~ _.&ti; ~ ';f!~ ;t;~'=g:c ~ic 'i.e ~.- ~ ~ Ie ,.~~~,~ ~:~ E!5-:a..2 8~~%g 8 g m !,i , f~ eo.cgS i l~ jf~f:~~ j 1,:1 .;~~~~ ~ o~ :5 ;;.e~s l~ ~ 70 2.:i '" ~ I" iiJ!; ~i 8~ g !!'C i!! _(1c3:! E ..;; 8 Z.:......I'I.. ~ % Ci;.Q'" o'~'5 ," ~-g ~~M=,g ~ <::l-=t:J)Q. SP :: y-: s~-g I~'" ~ !!:~a~- l~ E~gQ..~ Ig rn~g:~~ ,,1& ~! >..: p' ~i ~[ gj~ ~f~ ~h~ " " g '5 " .0 '" i '" ...0 ?; ~r: II R~ :~ ,,~ ~,i ;Ii t;=. e~ ,. '" ~G ~;: "'3 jf .~.~ .32 ~ {JJW 1 ! ,.:11 ~ I- e:: j ~ , s J[ Ie :-9 Ii to; ~ ~ ~ '0 to I-. o ;::l: I ~~ - ~ ~~~ ~a ~o 0"0 c... E1S C.5 :;.a. =5 i ~ ~~ ...:.... ..)t.: c-:-:;: 00 DQ I.. l.2 IJ 111 ,~ l~ ;; ~ :)! ~ ; ~ Q ~w :<< ;~ .~~ 'E .... - t :;. ~ ~ ;; ~ DISCLOSURE ST A?f:SI\1I:E.f>Jl: '.','\"", .-(', "-" .. ",'''' Bq~~TON,&~ILE Agenda 1~~qrs,#t4~;~S :'.,..~~g~9 . '"., ." ._.,.~. ~:.'"- -., ,..--, Item #14 & 15 Boynton & Pile Discontinuance, abandonment and closure of a portion of J ersey Avenue beginning on the south side of Virginia Beach Boulevard and extending approximately 155.67 feet in a southerly Direction Discontinuance, abandonment and closure of a portion of Jersey A venue beginning on the south side of Virginia Beach Boulevard and extending approximately 107.90 feet in a southerly Direction District 2 Kempsville April 12, 2006 CONSENT Barry Knight: Our next two items to be placed on consent agenda are Items #14 and 15, Boynton and Pile. An Ordinance upon Application of Cornelius F. Boynton, Jr. and Antonina Boynton for the discontinuance, closure and abandonment of a portion of Jersey A venue beginning on the south side of Virginia Beach Boulevard and extending approximately 155.67 feet in a southerly direction, and an Ordinance upon Application of Lope B. Pile and Mercy Pile for the discontinuance, closure and abandonment of a portion of Jersey Avenue beginning on the south side of Virginia Beach Boulevard and extending approximately 107.90 feet in a southerly direction in the Kempsville District with five conditions. Eddie Bourdon: Mr. Chairman, again, Eddie Bourdon for the record. Weare in accord with all the conditions and I ensure the Commission that this street closure will not come back again. It will be finalized. Barry Knight: Thank you. Eddie Bourdon: Thank you very much. Barry Knight: We've seen it about three times before. Anyone present today that objects to putting agenda Item #14 & 15 on the consent agenda? If not, Mr. Livas. Henry Livas: This request is a closure of a portion of Jersey A venue at the south side of Virginia Beach Boulevard, and. the applicants intend to purchase the two halves of Jersey Avenue to incorporate it into their adjoining properties. As far as the background is concerned, you may have just heard that the street closure was previously approved by City Council on June 12,2001 and also on June 22, 2004. However, in both cases the applicants failed to follow through on the conditions of closure and the approvals were subsequently voided. We recommend that this closure be approved since there is no need Item #14 & 15 Boynton & Pile Page 2 for the right -of- way except for drainage. We also recommend approval of the request along with five conditions. One of the condition s would address the drainage issue. Therefore, we put this on the consent agenda. Barry Knight: Thank you Henry. Do I hear a motion? There is a motion to approve by Kathy Katsias. Ronald Ripley: Second. Barry Knight: A second by Ron Ripley. Any discussion? Call for the question. ANDERSON BERNAS CRABTREE HENLEY KA TSIAS KNIGHT LIVAS RIPLEY STRANGE WALLER WOOD AYES NOO ABSO ABSENT 3 ABSENT AYE AYE AYE AYE AYE AYE AYE AYE ABSENT ABSENT Ed Weeden: Bya vote of 8-0, the Board has approved Items #14 & 15 for consent. ~AERjDLA/'; SOURcE SA 5t.0 ON PL: :::ORC>ED l~i DEED BOOK 2431, PAGE 150 !, PORnON Of Jt RS[r AVENUE.' TO Sf. Gl.CSE.D: [- ....7 :.~?] 3, AREA OF .JmSE:Y A VENlJf TO GE. CUJSFD -= 5,607 SQUARE FE.ET /0,129 ACRE. THIS p;.A '1 ,:; NOT INTUlDED TO ~')HON .t.~.n f:,lo'sEMt1\iTS OR PHYSICAL FEATURES THAT Wi Y M-f LeT :i-!IS PROPERT'(, ,J, TH!,:; ?L.A. -j :)OES NO' CONSmUT[ A SUf3DIV1:~jON or LAND. I F_',. ",!-"'5- rD: :, -, ::>R1='PAI"?E'l V,""!";';, I"', rH::' 'J-';:-'.:f:;",T 'J""'- ~ n,'r; E REPORT i ' '-'" '.. ., - . - ~ ".., '. ".. .. ., ,~- , , i \:;)11 ;- cr P'I'.' I....~ I, .-: S OLD YIJ Q ~ \" - B)""()"",,, ."A, . ~ ,::-:jc;(~1,y.,_' ;;.8;1," t .~Aii. (SI: 1/)'/-4 n '$ ~ ." . - ~ 4 If' ~ ~.</ c;lJ:'-.. I ;t: ~ <:J~,.~' ..J, S ~('It/C.'iI~/.</f;;-;-tCjJ (1 ,5;! t::) (.JD LOT ! ..90' 6<1",]<[, .... 1 "'''4 C 1f.7,'7 ~ I ~O~ DRILL . 1'1~ 'D O~ :.o~ 'Dll-t O/~ I "'" (' I.S \"....s, 0<1.<' Ii' V, ; If: 'iOLE_.______. -----...-- _.. -.._._ ?,-' 9 . <<I.,) 0< "Cr /Jt;J ~b i ~ '<,. / . 6' &>' Z ~ tr/~OOS& '(D 1 IS ~ b }U-il1::H 1 A L.OT 4 tf~ \'~J / /' /' / ,~/ ,/ ./ to T ;: , / / ;' / LOT .3 ;""J ..' .../' ./ ~ //~ ,/., [;),/ t::r ..- . LL /:i: .' / .,.' w/ I: / IY ,/ <( -.----- -----...- -...------- --- e LOT 5 , . ~'- .,.// '<t C'l l.O OJ I l() ~ LOT 3 r--- l.O '<f' ,/ . '-.... . / / / ./ l.O -<;t / /./' ..- ./ ,/' :.-OT 6 ../" z Cl <.:> LOT 4 L01 7 S 89"45'05" W -~l <0 <!) w......... ::) Z co Z a::: LC) LtJJ:;:;:)~' >~(Q c..: <9 :ii a: ~ >- ~ '<to ~ ~ ~ a:i a:i o::cr~c::i 1LI:;.............. ~....... to '<t ('.J 11..1.-.. ~ :::e UI') aJ o-<{<O I oa:Q.'~ .-J I CD 9..f ~ r< dai ~ --"") L --1' 2) tlJ --- ~ _.J L~ L.()T 8. BLOCK 25. EUCliD PL...\CE (M.B. 4, P. 6.3) ~;P!N i467--8.,)-64-27 EXHIBIT PLAT SHOWING A PORTiON OF JERSEY AVENUE TO BE CLOSED A.DJA.CENT 'TO lOTS 1 THRU 7, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 25 AND lOTS 3 AND 4, BLOCK 26, EUCLID PLACE (M.f:l, 4, P 63) VIF:G!N1r, f-3EA.CH. ViF~GiN:A SC;'.L.E: i "=<25' AUGUST .3. 1999 JOHN E. SIRINE AND ASSOCIATES, l m. su RVE(ORS. tNGIN [FRS. PLANNERS 4317 BONNEv ROA.D V;RG!Ni,l\ !3E ACH, VHGIN;A 23452 G ,)t:.. I---------_T EVISED: NOV. 12, 1999 50 75 100 FEET -{ ---.---1...._._ =1' GR;\PHIC SCALE SHEET 1 OF 1 uc:::c: I")~"'"{ r-\ I""'\,....~ r"'""" n C"" c.:.,"": Map L-4 Mop Not to Scole First Land;ng Slate Park P-I CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Application of Glenn H. Gettier, Jr. for a Variance to Section 5B of the Site Plan Ordinance, Floodplain Regulations on property located at 493 Goodspeed Road (GPIN 2419411128). AICUZ is Less than 65 dB Ldn. DISTRICT 5- LYNNHAVEN MEETING DATE: May 22, 2007 . Background: There is an existing 3,200 square foot dwelling on the property at 493 Goodspeed Road, located in the Princess Anne Hills neighborhood. The applicantdesires to add a 12 foot by 24 foot (12'x24') addition to the master bedroom. The finished floor elevation of the existing home is at elevation 6.26 feet and the entire property is within the 100 year floodplain. The City of Virginia Beach is an active participant in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP); Virginia Beach residents hold 80 percent of all policies in Virginia. Insurance rates are based on what each locality does to positively address enforcement. One common measure is to require the finish floor elevation of structures to be constructed at an elevation higher than the base flood elevation. The base flood elevation for this site, based on the FEMA maps, is seven (7) feet. When this elevation is converted to the 1988 NA V datum, the base flood elevation is actually 6.18 feet. The existing house and proposed addition are shown at 6.26 feet. Section 4.1.B4 of the City's Site Plan Ordinance requires that the finished floor elevation be at least one (1) foot above the base flood elevation, or 7.18 feet at this location. This additional foot is required by the ordinance to provide residents further protection against flood events. Section 58.8 of the Floodplain regulations requires any variance to the requirement be reviewed and approved by City Council. The applicant is requesting a variance, as the finished floor elevation is proposed at 0.92 foot below the required 7.18 feet. . Considerations: According to correspondence between the Building Official's Office and the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, properties constructed at one (1) foot above the base flood elevation (BFE) receive a lesser insurance rate than those built at the 8FE. The property is currently insured at the higher rate, as the existing dwelling is not above the BFE. Due to the relatively small size of the proposed building addition, the resulting increase of insurance fees for the additional square footage is not significant enough to pro-rate the property at two (2) different rates. This means, even if the addition were to be built at the required one (1) foot above the 8FE, the entire structure, including the addition, would be insured at the higher insurance rate required for buildings constructed at the BFE level. Since there is no significant impact on the insurance rate and the impact to the floodplain in this case is minimal, both the Planning Glenn H. Gettier, Jr. Page 2 of 2 Commission and staff conclude that this property is a good candidate for a variance. . Recommendations: In sum, since the proposed construction within the floodplain will not impact other property owner's insurance rates, will not be built at or below the BFE, and is in keeping with the character of the surrounding properties and the neighborhood, the Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 10-0 to approve this request with the following conditions: 1.A site plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department, Development Services Center, for review and approval under all applicable City ordinances [this condition has been satisfied, as approval of the site plan was recently granted]. 2. The proposed addition shall be constructed as depicted on the site plan and shall be constructed at the elevation of the existing dwelling of 6.26 feet or higher. . Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement Planning Commission Minutes Location Map Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends approval. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department City Manager: ~ ~ t. Crs DY>"l. Floodplain Variance to Section 5B of the Site Plan Ordinance for development within the 100 year floodplain. Map L-4 M~~ Not ".-:l Sc,:)l.,. GLENN H. GETTlER, JR. Agenda Item 16 May 9,2007 Public Hearing Staff Planner: Carolyn A. K. Smith REQUEST: ADDRESS I DESCRIPTION: 493 Goodspeed Road GPIN: 24194111280000 COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT: 5 - L YNNHA VEN SITE SIZE: 24,072 square feet APPLICATION HISTORY: On April 11 , the Planning Commission deferred this application to provide time for the applicant and City staff to meet and to communicate further with state representatives of the Federal Flood Insurance Program. SUMMARY OF REQUEST There is an existing 3,200 square foot dwelling on the property at 493 Goodspeed Road, located in the Princess Anne Hills neighborhood. The applicant desires to add a 12 foot by 24 foot addition to the master bedroom. The finished floor elevation of the existing home is at elevation 6.26 feet and the entire property is within the 100 year floodplain. The City of Virginia Beach is an active participant in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP); Virginia Beach residents hold 80 percent of all policies in Virginia. Insurance rates are based on what each locality does to positively address enforcement. One common measure is to require the finish floor elevation of structures to be constructed at an elevation higher than the base flood elevation. The base flood elevation for this site, based on the FEMA maps, is seven (7) feet. When this elevation is converted to the 1988 NAV datum, the base flood elevation is actually 6.18 feet. The existing house and proposed addition are shown at 6.26 feet. Section 4.1.B4 of the City's Site Plan Ordinance requires that the finished floor elevation be at least one (1) foot above the base flood elevation, or 7.18 feet at this location. This additional foot was added to the ordinance to provide residents further protection against flood events and enables residents to obtain a reduced flood insurance rate. Section 5B.8 of the Floodplain regulations requires any variance to the requirement be reviewed and approved by City Council. ",'."':"'\;,,;;;., .'N",,', GLENN H.GETTIER,JR. ,Agenda Item16 Page 1 LAND USE AND ZONING INFORMATION EXISTING LAND USE: One-story, single-family dwelling, approximately 3,200 square feet of floor area SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: South: East: West: NATURAL RESOURCE AND CULTURAL FEATURES: · Goodspeed Road · Single-family dwellings / R-20 Residential District . Crystal Lake · Single-family dwellings / R-20 Residential District · Single-family dwellings / R-20 Residential District · Single-family dwellings / R-20 Residential District This site is within the Chesapeake Bay watershed and is adjacent to Crystal Lake. The Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Board reviewed and approved the request on June 26,2006 with the following conditions: 1. A pre-construction meeting shall be convened with Civil Inspections prior to any land disturbance, inclusive of demolition. 2. A wire 36" re-enforced erosion and sedimentation control measure (silt fence) shall be installed prior to any land disturbance and shall remain in place until such time as vegetative cover is established. 3. Permanent and / or temporary soil stabilization as determined by staff shall be applied to all disturbed / denuded area(s) prior to a final building inspection or certificate of occupancy. 4. Construction limits shall lie a maximum of 10' seaward of improvements. 5. The construction access way shall be noted on the site plan, as well as the stockpile staging area. 6. Stormwater from proposed impervious cover shall be conveyed to stormwater management facilities 7. If and when the shoreline is re-hardened, a rip-rap revetment shall be constructed in lieu of a vertical retaining structure (vinyl, timber or steel bulkhead). The toe of said revetment shall lie at or landward of mean high water or tidal vegetated wetlands. Said condition shall be so noted on the site plan. 8. Under deck treatment of sand and gravel shall be installed. " GLENN H. ,.GETTlER, JR. ',Agenda IteJ;n 16 Page 2 9. ** As offered by the applicant, payment shall be made to the Lynnhaven Oyster Heritage Program concurrent with site plan approval. Payment shall be in the amount of $59.35 and is based on 25% of the proposed impervious cover. Said payment shall provide for the equivalent of an approximate 64.8 sq. ft., 12-inch deep oyster shell plant within the Lynnhaven River Basin. 10. Buffer restoration equal to 200% of the proposed impervious cover (518 square feet) shall be installed and shall utilize bayscape landscaping principles. The required restoration shall be in areas currently devoted to turf and shall have a mulch layer of organic material 4" - 6" in depth. In addition to the aforementioned buffer restoration area, a minimum of eight (8) trees shall be installed and shall be comprised of 50% deciduous and 50% evergreen species. The required trees shall be evenly distributed throughout the lot to the greatest extent practicable. Said restoration shall be installed prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy or final building inspection. Said condition shall be so noted on the site plan. 11. The site plan shall be modified to address the aforementioned restoration. 12. The conditions and approval associated with this variance are based on the revised site plan dated May 30, 2006, prepared by Gallup Surveyors & Engineers, LTD. 13. A revised site plan shall be submitted to the Department of Planning, Development Services Center for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. AICUZ: The site is in an AICUZ of Less than 65 dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana, and is thus out of the area of concern. EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the request. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan Map designates this site as being within the Primary Residential Area. The City's Comprehensive Plan states that the objective of the Primary Residential Area is to protect the ~ ... . . ._. -- -.-0-0 ., GLENN H: :GETTIER, JR. . Agenda Item 16 P~ge 3 predominantly suburban character that is defined, in large measure, by the stable neighborhoods that make up the Primary Residential Area. The Comprehensive Plan recognizes the primacy of preserving and protecting the overall character, economic value and aesthetic quality of the stable neighborhoods. Evaluation: The City of Virginia Beach is an active participant in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) with the residents of Virginia Beach holding 80 percent of all policies in Virginia. Insurance rates are based on what each locality does to positively address enforcement. One common measure is to require the finish floor elevation of structures be constructed at an elevation higher than the Base Flood Elevation (BFE). The BFE for this site is 6.18 feet; the existing house and proposed addition are shown at 6.26 feet. Section 4.1.B4 of the City's Site Plan Ordinance requires that the finished floor elevation be at least one (1) foot above the BFE. Thus, for this site, the finished floor elevation requirement is 7.18 feet. This additional foot was added to the ordinance to provide residents further protection against flood events and enables residents to obtain a reduced flood insurance rate. Section 5B.8 of the Floodplain regulations requires any variance to the finish floor requirement be reviewed and approved by City Council. Section 5B.8 of the Site Plan Ordinance requires that no variance be granted unless floodplain storage capacity is mitigated at a one-to-one ratio of the area fill to ensure no net loss of storage and that all mitigation be located contiguous to the existing floodplain. The proposed fill necessary to construct the addition within the floodplain cannot be mitigated on-site as the entire property is located within the 100- year floodplain. Therefore, a "no decrease" in flood storage cannot be achieved. Mitigation cannot be contiguous to the existing floodplain since the existing site is within the floodplain. According to correspondence between the Building Official's Office and the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, properties constructed at one (1) foot above the BFE receive a lesser insurance rate than those built at the BFE. The property is currently insured at the higher rate, as the existing dwelling is not above the BFE. Due to the relatively small size of the proposed building addition, the resulting increase of insurance fees for the additional square footage is not significant enough to pro- rate the property at two (2) different rates. This means, even if the addition were to be built at the required one (1) foot above the BFE, the entire structure, including the addition, would be insured at the higher insurance rate required for buildings constructed at the BFE level. As there is no significant impact on the insurance rate and the impact to the floodplain is minimal, staff concludes that this property is a good candidate for a variance. The penalties in insurance rates apply not only to construction below the BFE but construction at the BFE without a variance. In sum, since the proposed construction within the floodplain will not impact other property owner's insurance rates, will not be built at or below the BFE, and is in keeping with the character of the surrounding properties and the neighborhood, Staff recommends approval of this request as conditioned below. CONDITIONS 1. A site plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department, Development Services Center, for review and approval under all applicable City ordinances. 2. The proposed addition shall be constructed as depicted on the site plan and shall be constructed at the elevation of the existing dwelling of 6.26 feet or higher. GLENN H.. GETTlER, JR. Agenda Iternt6 Page4 NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. Plans submitted with this rezoning application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes and Standards. The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. ,,- . _ ... . ___.>,,:,', ",::. _ ''v < .::: ".-<^'''-> GLENN H GETTlER, JR. '.Agenda Item16 Page 5 AERIAL OF SITE LOCATION .' '.. ..... '",:.>., GLENN H..GETTIER;JR. Agenda Item 16 e6 .t. . J! I 5 III '_I Ila f! !I,.I. Ill, 'n,I.. . ~ ' !I; is.- ~I'.I 'I I_I il:; Its. !I.~ 81 ~Ii !i. " -+. " I . II .1 i:tl!s if! I i! I~~~' 5 il " ! ~ g .~ Jt.i 1=1 Ii ~ di~ '~.,:-'" i&'- ~ o e o ~ 0.:: , i .Y t .t.. _... Ii. D f ,IiI l ! l' if.l L~ !!l in ill i In I;.~,i.ii ,,: i..I~ i ilU II in i ri!~ SITE PLAN r"_,_ '. .'R JR H: GETTlE, . GLENN "endaltem16 Ag , Page 7 .e,....".o..'.", ....':.,. F..' ...., is rt IS M'WIJ .7.73.0 .. .,. "",} tI( .r, I II ~ 19' ~ III I ; i f1 Iii III Z:S if a c ~ l .. / I i SITE PLAN - DETAIL GLENN H. GETTlER. JR. " Agenda Jteri116 P,"8 -..,--It N:llS3C HO\~llNl '? 31m-03JJH:llfV a3~IS"WOHllill\lH)jl:ln8 ~INI!lijlA 'lI1C~ijON V'~~ ~I; - a '" u :I~ "'\ ~,I ! \ "l I ~ <C i~h '\li~.~.:s.: n.:iIOC;.L"29'5i3Ha+e ,WiU'tJ',")(J:;otlillONI-=-;!1I!'1S lJ.Sl,,~'."'t~. avo~ a~~dSaOOD 86t 3JN3mS3~ ~3IJ.J.3D .' ~ ~! J~, i: Ii ~S3 ij Addition 1 i ~~ d BUILDING ELEVATION GLENN H~ -BETTIER;JR. ;Agenda Item 16 . Page 9 Jl ..." Ii I I I , ; JJ d !s 't'INl9ll1^ 'll1O~1I0N "OI"Ql!fJ.S.l.~~tOO~azrlSl~ .t.L'itZ'.......~I~3.1mrJ.s'aa:.".t16 --.,............. II N:>I~a 1I01113.l.N1 'I? 31lru.::l3.l,lfOlI'If 03311IS'dJlOIUIJlMj)jllllB aVOH a:a::a:dsaoo~ E6v :a:~N:a:OIs:a:a a:a:IJ...L:3:~ D I ~i ~I I i G~ ..' ~ .. D t U , , , , , , FLOOR PLAN GLENN H~ .GETTIER, JR. , Agenda Item16 . , Page .10 Map L-4 Map Not to Scale ! First Landing P _I ~ State Park N Crystal Lake No Zoning History to Report ZONING HISTORY GLENN H.GETTIER,JR. ':Agenda Item16 PageJ1 fit ~ z w :is U.I ~ ...~.. w 0:. ::;:) ~ ...J o co 2i g- f! it, J~I ill IIi lid ~jn IjO i~d .. ;1i' ;Jft Itl; j:~:l iilll,ilU Jr.'" ~J.. ~t I-I Ji.JIJ i ,,; p g - ';i 8. g ~ ~ 'c .Q C::J ~ j ~ (5 ... ($ 8 w ~ t ~'1i ;;; U).:: 15 0": ..Ie it: ~; iir; i5 e: "",' i~ !j .. rg ...0._ .......~ 0.""0.... .:l !_r::~~ t-~.2 "" <~~o21 !;;~ &,;6 E-:-:- -s ~~ 8 $I ;;'4' !II e,!'(b i 8i~ ,~ g:! i~::;-~ ~ ~tJ 15 1: ~g:.J :1 -~, ::::: '0..... ~ e '" ~ .. o c S L> i i ~;;:; ~~ Olii') -- 0 i~ ):: :J-~ J;n ~.s is Ill'i:! !~ .:::c. ..Q. c:lc:i -Slll ..is ~ ~ . ~-~ ,~ ,; 0- :;:;; 0':;:; t3 .5~ :i !~ i :S~ CJ N J! ~~'a .5~li a ~ i~1 t.1 zllji!! jillt 1,.1, .8'1, ~!I,.. 1""'.1 . iii ,'.lb(5.. .5.' ,~ f,', .~, ~,C,CI -,. 1il',.J'" :.1 '..- ii;~ jigj~lisJif"'~ hI !I~dll!il !Ii i!jff.'tll,ll,!,.J. j;j tlllillU :.l~ . i1,I,:"J,i1f',f'.,] Ilj5!!llltJI .ft~ ffir,lai,l5ajJ .It: IjJ!~III, I~, i~ ~ il'g.! . ii.. "Ii,.., .... 'SI,to, t .I 1,.'1." I, ... il'a>: lJ!it~-Il:'.i~ .'.,...1..1.. tl."J.I'i-....,~..'..!..,il,~.,.. ~, j" 1~~ ",s~'l5i IN - N.:.~_ 1'1_ S!" i~i'l:a 'II Is~~JtIJ E "" .9- ,Jt:; .. ~ '" 0: "" c" ,g e 8. o <> III 55 .:t:- ,!!! ~ IC:S J~ g;'-g llI.. e>! 5:&' e~ ~'-2 ..x. ,;:i gS .:;:::.t::. 0'0 o 'Ii '" e .S' "' .& .. i ~ t> i ,.t; E ~'5 i !So 4> J!!" <> a:= ~ tl.I "',~ iii ~~~ 1S~ (i):::~ 0te gig ~~ l;.>lo""'Cdil8 !!~ .g'.,~ ;; ~ o..,ii.!i!="" ~>-~ ~2 ,~~ ~lt~Ji o ""- Jll .2 :; ~~.~!;a ~ i:r <;LiS !: :;> ,. LUe58Ej Q.i;;l.e- .ell> 0""- 8 c C:J:) ~~IlI,gc<> O.,m~i5 ::':'co~ ~~e.~~ o ~o- G;l ''e .~ ;: al ~ ~ si!6'.; ~ ~e.=; i ""ei !i E 1.= ...J .;: 0--2. V~~....: ;c'C) :-s1~3 H.i'~ i.c;"j 11'" ~ lifl J I'~j ~I I Ilf: M: .~ IIi I Iliff! J'ail, ~ ! .1. -: 1i .. I uni: ; i~tff ~M I! IIhi~ I ~ 'E ll> .. .. 4) c ~ Z "0 !! !.!! ~"B d\,~ a~ -~~ !.!!~ 32..... :g~ ",- ~.ii I!! !~ I#E ~13 ~li _Cl. llIlll :541 ",,:1: ~€ ~'~ ~~ .5:11 -0 Ill"'" i~ ....~ N g \;:: , 0: -z; .... i € a c; ,Q 'i o E-c: g,g ej;j 6~ :t:2' .. 0 '-i) e tJt, ~&. ~~ 0.,- ~5 ~i ;~ ~ 0 ~ Sl.", ;< :;:~ ~ $ "~ E- e.s ~i) ~ o IU J~il' I'l :> J x GLENN H. GETIIER, JR. Agenda Item 16 Page,,12 Item #16 Glenn H. Gettier, Jr. Floodplain Regulations 493 Goodspeed Road District 5 Lynnhaven May 9, 2007 REGULAR Barry Knight: Mr. Secretary, next item to be heard? Joseph Strange: The next application is application #16, Glenn H. Gettier, Jr. An application of Glenn H. Gettier, Jr. for a Variance to Section 5B of the Site Plan Ordinance, Floodplain Regulations, on property located at 493 Goodspeed Road, District 5, Lynnhaven, with two conditions. Barry Knight: We1come. Eddie Bourdon: Thank you. Mr. Chairman, you all heard me on the Gettier application last month. We greatly appreciate being allowed to move forward on the agenda. Given what Cheri Hainer briefed you all on this morning, I will let her speak. We appreciate, again, the efforts of everyone involved, and what Mr. Whitney said this morning trying to put all these different arms of the bureaucracy together to get to the right answer, and this is the right answer. There is no impact on anyone by granting this variance. I appreciate what Ms. Hainer said this morning about the need to go through this process. I'm certainly not going to voice any disagreement with that. Again, thank you. Barry Knight: Thank you Mr. Bourdon. Mr. Strange, we'll call up Cheri Hainer. Cheri, if you would please tell us, of course, your name and the position with the City, and maybe what you feel is appropriate. Cheri Hainer: Sure. Thank you. I'm Cheri Hainer. I'm the Building Official for the City of Virginia Beach. I'm response to questions raised about this application, we contacted David Gunn, who is the Administrator of the State Flood Insurance program, and Mr. Bob Link, who is our FEMA representative for Region ill, which is their office in Philadelphia. We sent them all of our information. The correspondence went back and forth between the City and Mr. Bourdon, and our ordinance as well, and the whole Site Plan Ordinance. They determined that the Site Plan Ordinance and the floodplain regulations do require new development to be at one foot above the base flood elevation. However, Section 5B(8) does have the provisions to allow for a variance, to allow construction at the base flood elevation. The reason being is that if the existing structure is currently at the base flood elevation, it is being charged a rate for insurance at that level. Not at the raised level. And they do not prorate their fees based on if the new addition were built at the one-foot above. So, since the addition is less than 50 percent, it Item #16 Glenn H. Gettier, Jr. Page 2 doesn't qualify as substantial improvement. There would be nothing done to the existing structure; therefore, it is appropriate to allow the addition to be built at the base flood elevation. They did say though, according to FEMA regulations, that they need the documentation in a form of a variance that it has been reviewed and approved to have the addition constructed at the base level. If not, if we had just granted the pennit, FEMA would deem it non-compliant, and would have charged the new rates for construction as if it were below the base flood elevation, and that could have had a negative impact on the City. As I said earlier, there was an issue with the change in the data in establishing the base flood elevation, and FEMA has promised us that we will have updated maps by July. Mr. Link and Mr. Gunn came in last week and did training for the Planning Department and other divisions throughout the City who are effected by this. We had almost 85 in attendance, and our training was very well received. Weare going to look at the current floodplain regulations with City staff and the City Attorney to update them so they are in accordance with the updated FEMA regulations and better relate with the State Regulations and Building Code. Barry Knight: Thank you for that explanation. Are there any questions of Ms. Hainer? Okay. Cheri Hainer: Thank you. Barry Knight: Thank you. Yes sir Mr. Bourdon? Eddie Bourdon: I would like to mention one thing. Actually two things. I want to thank Kay Wilson in the City Attorney's Office. She has been very helpful throughout this process. I know that she and Ms. Hainer said that the Floodplain Ordinance does need to have a little bit work done to it. The thing that I wanted to mention, the conditions that are recommended in the staff report, the fIrst one of the two that the site plan be submitted, the Gettier site plan has not only been submitted but it has been approved. It has been approved for a number of months. So condition 1 has already been met. We have been going through this process, unfortunately, going on two years. That condition has already been satisfied. Barry Knight: Thank you. Do any Commissioners have any questions for Mr. Bourdon or Ms. Hainer? I'll open it up for discussion or entertain a motion. Okay, Mr. Redmond? David Redmond: Mr. Chairman, Glenn H. Gettier, Jr. is a client of my real estate firm. He is also a personal friend. I personally provide services to Mr. Gettier. On the advice of the City Attorney, I am going to abstain from this vote. Last month, when we first saw this application, I filed the appropriate letter for public inspection with our interim Director Mr. Whitney. Barry Knight: Okay. Thank you. Item #16 Glenn H. Gettier, Jr. Page 3 David Redmond: That is item 16. Barry Knight: Mr. Crabtree? Eugene Crabtree: I will just very simply say that we beat this to death last month. I think, we all discussed, and made our comments that anyone would have on it, therefore, I think we ought to move forward with it. I make a motion that we approve the application as submitted. Barry Knight: Do I have a second? Mr. Bernas. There is a motion on the table to approve agenda item 16. The motion made by Gene Crabtree and seconded by Jay Bernas. Is there any other discussion? I'll call for the question. AYE 9 ANDERSON AYE BERNAS AYE CRABTREE AYE HORSLEY AYE HENLEY AYE KATSIAS KNIGHT AYE LIVAS AYE REDMOND STRANGE AYE WOOD AYE NAY 0 ABSl ABSENT 1 ABSENT ABS Ed Weeden: By a vote of 9-0, with the abstention so noted, the application of Glenn H. Gettier, Jr. has been approved. Eddie Bourdon: Thank you for the courtesy. Ac9-2 Subdivision Variance CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Appeal to Decisions of Administrative Officers in regard to certain elements of the Subdivision Ordinance, Subdivision for Edward A. Kurpiel, Jr. and Kathleen T. Kurpiel. Property is located at 2184 Princess Anne Road (GPIN 2414059787). DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE MEETING DATE: May 22,2007 . Background: The applicant requests a variance to the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance for the purpose of creating a .983 acre flag lot from an existing 2.073 acre lot. . Considerations: The existing lot is 2.073 acres and has a lot width of 242 feet. A single-family house and two-story garage is located just south of the center of the lot. The existing house and garage are proposed to remain on one of the new lots, designated as Lot A-2-B on the submitted plat. Lot A-2-B will'have a lot width of 195 feet and will consist of 1.091 acres in area. The second lot, Lot A-2-A, will be a flag lot with a 51-foot stem. The total size of that lot is proposed to be 42,818.62 square feet (0.983 acres) in area, with the majority of the lot area to be behind the existing house. Access to both proposed lots will be provided off of Princess Anne Road. A subdivision variance is required because Lot A-2-A (the flag lot) does not meet the required 100-foot minimum lot width established by the Zoning Ordinance for the R-20 Residential District. Both the Planning Commission and staff conclude that strict application of the ordinance would not produce an undue hardship as defined by the Subdivision Ordinance warranting the granting of a Subdivision Variance. The applicant notes that prior to 2001, the property consisted of approximately 2.75 acres and was somewhat irregular in shape due to the fact that the left rear portion of the lot protruded for some distance in a westerly direction. That portion of the lot, which contained about 0.75 acres, was severed off and sold to the adjacent landowner, who merged the property with their own. That action, however, is not justification for a variance since the action of selling the 0.75 acre portion to the adjacent property owner is self-inflicted. The applicant's lot is not irregularly shaped, nor does it possess any physical features that are a hardship justifying a variance. There is no extraordinary situation or condition that creates a hardship. The specific criteria for granting a Subdivision Variance are presented in the Evaluation and Recommendation section of the attached staff report. Edward A. Kurpiel, Jr. & Kathleen T. Kurpiel Page 2 of 2 The applicant has not identified a hardship significant enough to warrant support of the requested subdivision variance. . Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 7-3 to deny this request. . Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement Planning Commission Minutes Location Map Recommended Action: Staff recommends denial. Planning Commission recommends denial. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department )~ City Manager: ~l \l.. . ~ ~ \ Edward A. Kurpiel, Jr. Staff Planner: Leslie Bonilla AJi-2 EDWARD A. KURPIEL, JR. & KATHLEEN T. KURPIEL Agenda Item 11 April 11, 2007 Public Hearing REQUEST: Subdivision Variance to Section 4.4(b) of the Subdivision Ordinance that requires all newly created lots meet all the requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance. ADDRESS I DESCRIPTION: Property located at 2184 Princess Anne Road. GPIN: 24140597870000 COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT: 7 - PRINCESS ANNE SITE SIZE: 2.073 acres (or 90,305.40 square feet) APPLICATION HISTORY: Planning Commission denied this application on November 8th, 2006. At the November 8th, 2006 Planning Commission hearing, the applicant was present, however the applicant's lawyer / representative was not present. City Council heard the application on December 12, 2006 and requested that the application be referred back to Planning Commission in order to provide the applicant's lawyer a chance to represent his client. Existing Lot: The existing lot is 2.073 acres and has a lot width of 242 feet. A single-family house and two-story garage is located just south of the center of the lot. SUMMARY OF REQUEST Proposed Lots: It is the intent of the applicant to subdivide the existing lot into two lots. The newly created, Lot A-2-B, has a lot width of 195 feet and consists 1.091 acres in area. The existing house and garage will not be moved and are situated entirely on Lot A-2-B. Lot A-2-A, is a flag shaped lot with a lot width of 51 feet. Lot A-2-A is 42,818.62 square feet (0.983 acres) in area and is designed for a future single-family dwelling. EDWARD A. KURPIEL, JR. & KATHLEENT. KUR~IEL Agenda Iternt1 ~?gE?1 Access to both proposed lots will be provided off of Princess Anne Road. A subdivision variance is required because Lot A-2-A does not meet the required 100-foot minimum lot width established by the Zoning Ordinance for the R-20 Residential District. Jtem Lot A-2-A Lot A-2-B Minimum Lot Width in feet 100 51* 195 Minimum Lot Area in square feet 20,000 42,818.62 47,502.18 *Variance required LAND USE AND ZONING INFORMATION EXISTING LAND USE: Single-family dwelling. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: South: East: . Single-family dwelling / R-20 Residential District . Agriculture undeveloped / AG-2 Agricultural District . City of Virginia Beach/AG-2 Agricultural District . Single-family dwelling / AG-2 Agricultural District . Historical and Cultural District / R-20 Residential District and 0- 2 Office District . Single-family dwellings / R-20 Residential District . Church / R-20 Residential District West: NATURAL RESOURCE AND CULTURAL FEATURES: There are no known significant natural resource or cultural features on this site. AICUZ: The site lies wholly within the AICUZ of 65-70 dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. The Navy's Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) Program designates residential development in this contour as incompatible. However, the 2005 Hampton Roads Joint Land Use Study produced no constraints on development in the 65-70 db Ldn AICUZ. IMPACT ON CITY SERVICES MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN (MTP) I CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP): Princess Anne Road in front of this site is a 2-lane undivided minor suburban arterial. Upon Completion of Capital Improvement Plan 2-195, scheduled to begin 2010-11, traffic will be shifted to a new alignment and the existing Princess Anne Road in the vicinity of this project will become a cul-de-sac residential street used mostly for access to existing lots. The Master Transportation Plan identifies plans to improve Princess Anne Road into a new undivided highway with a 143-foot right-of-way alignment and multi-use bikeways. EDWARD A. KURPIEL, JR. & KATHLEENT.KURPIEL Agenda IterD>11 e~gE?2 TRAFFIC: Street Name Present Present Capacity Generated Traffic Volume Princess Anne 14,059 ADT 1 13,600 ADT (Level of Existing Land Use ;< - 10 Road Service "C") ADT 15,000 ADT 1 (Level of Proposed Land Use 3 - Service "D") 20 16,200 ADT 1 (Level of Service "E") Average Dally Tnps 2as defined by one (1) single-family house 3 as defined by two (2) single-family houses WATER: City water service does not front the property, but may be extended for connection purposes provided hydraulic analysis supports the potential demand. Health Department approval is required for private wells. SEWER: This subdivision must connect to the City's 3-inch force main in Princess Anne Road. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT: The referenced subdivision must develop a stormwater management plan for water quantity and quality in accordance with the Public Works Specifications and Standards. The stormwater management plan shall provide protection from detrimentally impacting all downstream receiving storm drain systems. The project will need to identify adequate offsite receiving drainage systems. FIRE: The proposed new home must be within 150 feet of the street or an approved access road must be provided within 150 feet of the new home. There is a requirement for a 20-foot wide road with all-weather surface capable of supporting a 75,000 pound imposed load. A turn-around must also be provided to facilitate emergency apparatus using either a cul-de-sac or hammerhead. Section 9.3 of the Subdivision Ordinance states: No variance shall be authorized by the Council unless it finds that: A. Strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship. B. The authorization of the variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, and the character of the neighborhood will not be adversely affected. C. The problem involved is not of so general or recurring a nature as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of general regulations to be adopted as an amendment to the ordinance. D. The hardship is created by the physical character of the property, including dimensions and topography, or by other extraordinary situation or condition of such property, or by EDWARD A. KURPIEL, JR. & KATHLEEN!. KURPIEL ~genda lte~il1 R?g~3 the use or development of property immediately adjacent thereto. Personal or self- inflicted hardship shall not be considered as grounds for the issuance of a variance. E. The hardship is created by the requirements of the zoning district in which the property is located at the time the variance is authorized whenever such variance pertains to provisions of the Zoning Ordinance incorporated by reference in this ordinance. EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION Recommendation: Staff cannot support this subdivision variance request to create a parcel that does not meet minimum lot width requirements. Staff finds that strict application of the ordinance would not produce an undue hardship. Currently, the applicant's lot is not irregularly shaped and does not possess any physical features that are a hardship justifying a variance, nor is there any extraordinary situation or condition that creates a hardship. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan recognizes this site to be within the Primary Residential Area, Site 4.2 Nimmo Parkway / General Booth Intersection Area. The land use planning Policies and Principles for the Primary Residential Area focus strongly on preserving and protecting the overall character, economic value and aesthetic quality of the stable neighborhoods located in this area. Evaluation: The applicant requests this variance to allow a second house to be constructed on site. One house is allowed according to current City codes. The applicant notes that prior to 2001, the property consisted of approximately 2.75 acres and was somewhat irregular in shape in that the left rear portion of the lot protruded for some distance in a westerly direction. This area, which contained about 0.75 acres, was severed off and sold to the adjacent landowner, who merged the property with their own. This action, however, is self-inflicted and is not justification for a variance to City codes. Staff finds that the applicant has not identified a hardship significant enough to warrant support of the requested subdivision variance. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. Plans submitted with this rezoning application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes and Standards. The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. EDWARD A. KURPIEL, JR. & KATHLEI2NT. KUR~IEL Agenda . Item 11 P~g~4 ,,,Y':":':,,","',, ':;,,:.'>-.,' AERIAL OF SITE LQ9~~]10N> EDWARD A. KURPIEL, JR. & KATHLEENT. KURI?IEL A~enda IteUi11 ,. PC1g~5 ~ :: i~~l!1 I~ ;'I~!.; !I Siii!i :a ".....,,-,,~ i ". i-I~f !~.I-: j:>I!~ .,llQ' ..~ ~ : . 11 :1.. I i ! 11 1 3~"l'N : r- ~. . .. cot i I ~Ii~! ! :l~!~ 1 1 '2 IIII! I ~i ! L_.~ni r~ i>-15I,,=, ,.,~ . 8.1~" ~.I '~~ :-w.c~% 9!l).l~ lil~1 ~= ~I; !~Ii ,~~ :h If ..~. , '6 ;c:1> I!!"':t .1: III i ).l! ~I~ Xf(l \--1_ ). I ~.I!s.fll i~l! i! ~i?:1 iil j~ ~ PROPOSED SUBOI.VI,SION........', EDWARD A. KURPIEL, JR. & KATHLEENT.KURfflJEL ~gendalte.~11 ""8~g~6 ~_......... --..::-;;;;... E n:i"ii' ".10_- III >- .l!::: ~Ij~.; =:111:,- z ~l!l :a '0 .wi Ag-2 Subdivision Variance 1 11/14/95 Conditional Use Permit (Home Occupation - Mary Kay Withdrawn Cosmetics 2 11/27/07 Zonin Chan e (R-20 to AG-2 Conditional) Granted 3 1 0/23/89 Zoning Change (R-20 to 0-2) Granted 6/25/90 Use Permit (Church Addition) Granted 4 1 0/23/89 Reconsideration of Conditions, Zoning Change (R-3 Granted to 0-1 5 11/24/98 Modification to Conditions Granted 3/26/90 Zonin Chan e (R-20 to Conditional B-1 A) Granted 6 11/23/93 Zonin Chan e (R-20 to ConditionaI0-1) Granted 7 8/8/95 Zonin Chan e (R-20 to Conditional 0-1) Granted 8 5/25/99 Zonin Chan e (AG-1, AG-2 & R-20 to Conditional A-18) Granted 9 5/25/99 Zonin Chan e (AG-1, AG-2, & R-20 to Conditional 0-1) Granted ZONING.tlIS-rQ13V ..",., EDWARD A. KURPIEL, JR. & KATHLEENT. KUR~IEL Agf3nda lte('J'l.11 ,'. .'...1R<:i9f37 NOI!V3IlddV aJNYnIVA NOISIAIagll~ r- z w ::E w ~. r- (t) w n: n15 III :: 0..';::' "'0 III III ';:21 ,,,= ~ (U ll:..- (;."_"0 ci 0 c: c '" w '2: Q..; e'Oo ~'>,2 00> '"0'-"':'" "5 ;t€ ClJ. K.s,~ ~=E:g ~~-gg en o.'t:: g- 9 ~~ ": C c- tf) m..c.oQ;l __C-o ~~E~ <C0Cl<ni :z III <:: "" o~~ti '1=0.2<= -0 -~.~,~~ ~~g~~ ~ ;.,~ 8 OS ~ ~ Q Co~":O= ~ ~~l@ 8-g~Z ~~i:g o:)E$ '= 0" _.. .::r::: (tl ~') U> =a ~.~.~ _.::: > > ~- -:- -oOG} -oJ _ '" ,t1) 2 d ~ o g 'g <h '" $ '" .oS t..; C .g ~ ~ '0 a c; " We> lr .!; i: ~ g '0 0""'- d~ ~~ cn- t::Itf;: a.B. ~~ "'15 =~ ~ ~ >-;: o € 0,; ;: ~ [.~ ~~ c.. c..Q..:2"t '<^Qoo-Z! ~-;';~ o.c ::: &-;~~ 81D'::~ t;~~,~ :J) eO', '~ g Q.E .~g:~~ ~'~ -S ~ :'E~ ~ ,... d.....l C. ;0':1: = 0"': 0- o g '0 i, ....' .s: c ill. ~ !, e ~ 3"1 g:>: ~'~ %= g= e " '" .:::..... ..- ~ ~'E ~2'S Iii .::..::'C ~-;; ~ '€ g ~ c - '" ! r~ ,~C-t ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ '; ~~ g~~ ~~'t.. ~~.~ ~~l );)0"- ~~8 . g~~9 ~~g~ ; ~~~ :0 ~ c ?~-g g g,u ~ 0 ~~~ c ~~: . .r;.= _ 0 .>-;r, "U ttg~-g~~gg8 !~~~~ii~i~ 2 ,~ ~ ,~, ~ g; ~ ~ .~~ i~ta~,;:_g:,215,~ -E c .~ :$:: 0 ,>-~ ~ :t g .~~.~~ ~~]~~~ g~:3.~~;g~~e ~-;.g5o.g~g~g ~E.E'E~ ~'E~'!'E d:~~~g~~~8 ~ ~ ~ ~:~ ~ :: ~ ~ ~ ~'~~gg~6~Y;~ E.Q'=E]l~g~~~ ~o.~g-o v ~ ;:::= ~ li!tij i HI -~":'o;g.g~=1i;" f~!;i~r~}i 2~ g~~~€~ ~~. '~~~f~j! ~i~ =2. ~ ~ ::~~~i g~ ;..2=!20...~':f:..-= ~E ~~ g ~s'~ ~g !ti1ilnU~ .::>"'_"'11i~",5~, ~~~S]~.5E~~ i, l -g i ~~ ~ ~ c '.I) -~t:l t~ "' ~ ...:w~ ai.s [~ :: ~ .~ -0. _0.. '" '" :So :€-= '" ~ $'~ .~ .f!. .g~ "",.:2 ~i c-,; a '" <" g ';;' :::l .0 m ~ .t::I E <l> E .- 1 "?i'O ,~ {) &~ ~ Q ~ E:~ .. ::>.g~ o~ (/) - - '" ,. oCE "'''' <3~;;=o,g8 !!2~,g:.~~:! ~,~~g=~ LU~~2~~ ~~;a~~~ 00 o..",;::~ >~g~~~ ... "':;" 0..;:: lr~dEo" g:[g,8E~ o~~c~~ a:~Q.2.m-': c..c::ezii_B ;: ,!iL!::! ~ <l> .....'-cOO; '~ ~ 8.€t5 g;:OQ.$ '" 0 0.- $~] E [ sae;~- ~ ~ g,=~ !@Q.o't;~ ~o 0;- \::. o.c.:;;.,J - (.>=5~. oS ~~ _ g ~*'.&~~ IIIIII .@J?:::~.o[; -g;! ~~~ mm .~ o .0 ", ~ _ ~ ,: ~ U ~J~ '~~." ~'=.2~.~; ( ::j. _. ;'.a ~' i Z ..i """'1 ~..,<.~-e> ~ ~H~~~! )\:' z 8.-" '-" ,:'-i.. gi!,H~),;~ ....-="'-t~'('a iiI!ii~ ~~'i a: ~5i:: ~ 'E\ ~\ ~'j}i: ~!ij"~~ \i v:~~~ ~ C t/'; g '0 '" .Q " " :~ =":"'.. 'E~ C ;~ ~ 'Q ~<.> ~~ ~,;: ~ - :s~ ~...c:: -<;> <:: '" ~::: ~~ e ~~ >:e= .co.. _0.. c= !lj :0;10 ",.J:: Q- "'.::: ~~ .~~ 15:r! ,9 ~~ i2 , ~j ! ~ ~1) ,.2 Ii Ii 15 1&5 L>n i1 ;~. ~l :: g "" ai <; ~ '0 ~ ~-li * ~ ~ ~ " ci. 1: ~ '" .p co Cl. <:: .g ;;; <5 e.~ 00 (.)~..; d~ l- .;:: 05 :C:l? '" 0 .- -0 ~ '" ~~ og, ~8 5..5: c :: ;;; ;j ij :0 ~ 0 ~ tA -"'0 :x '0 t) C ;2 '~ 0,.0 .~ .:>) ~ s: c ~ !?. ,2 ~, ? Co '" c c .g. w Q S ~ .2 .. ~ <:> u .: 05 :c:- ?J: ~ ~- 'c - co ~~ ~~ oE J: 0 -Q. Q8 ~.~ :;5 o. ~ Q: 8-5 ~ DISCLOSURE STAtEMENT EDWARD A. KURPIEL, JR. & KATHLEpNT.KUR~IEL Agenda Iter;m11 rt~g~;S Item #11 Edward A. Kurpiel, Jr. and Kathleen T. Kurpiel Subdivision Ordinance 2184 Princess Anne Road District 7 Princess Anne April 11, 2007 REGULAR Barry Knight: Mr. Secretary, the next time. Joseph Strange: The next item is item 11, Edward A. Kurpiel, Jr. and Kathleen T. Kurpiel. An appeal to decisions of Administrative Officers to certain elements of the Subdivision Ordinance, Subdivision of Edward A. Kurpiel, Jr. and Kathleen T. Kurpiel. The property is located at 2184 Princess Anne Road, District 7, Princess Anne. Barry Knight: We1come Jim. It is nice to see you. Please state your name for the record. Jim Lam: Jim Lam, on behalf of the Kurpiels. This is in line with what you said earlier. Sir, I will try to keep things as simple as I possibly can. I'm a criminal attorney, primarily, so I'm accustomed to the fight. If I get out of hand, and if somebody says so, I'll escort myself out. I don't carry a portable phone so we don't have to worry about that going off. It is troublesome for me in doing these. I'm a little out of my way. In short, and in as much as I would like to complicate it with some sort of argument, I really can't. It seems to me that this is a relatively simple thing that we're trying to do and that is subdivide a piece of land that is a little better than two acres. What is left over or if the subdivision is allowed we end up with one acre each, which, I think is over twice the land mass. It is necessary for these things. Our problem is singular. As far as I can tell, the lack of property road frontage, I think there is 242 feet. I don't think it is on the plat but I can see it from here. I believe it is 242, which means in the perfect world if we slice it down the middle, we have 125 on each one. Because of the existing dwelling, the way that we have cut it obviously you don't get that. The way that we have it drawn is a 51 and a 195, which is the large piece. Mr. Kurpiel started this about a year ago, and, I guess, was under the impression that maybe this would be a little easier endeavor than it was when he waltzed into the DSc office. Initially, I got involved solely in the beginning hopefully just to help him file the paperwork. He got it through and it ultimately went before you. I think your agenda may not mention it but I believe we were here in September of last year. At that point, the existing driveway that you don't see here, and it goes to that two-car garage. We had a joint driveway. My recollection is that I got up here and I didn't like it. I withdrew or deferred it until the November date, which where we started out here. At some point, I just felt like those parties where going to cross and it would just become inconvenient and we had an awful lot of land to work with. So, that is why I think we deferred it until the November 8th date. At that point, Mr. Kurpiel is about as articulate as I, and I think he got up here. I was tied up in court. I don't think he Item # 11 Edward A. Kurpiel, Jr. and Kathleen T. Kurpiel Page 2 did a whole lot but stand here and say, "here I am, please help me." So, we had some trouble getting here. Unfortunately, he is not here today. We cannot control the dates that these hearings come up, and unfortunately, we've never been able to get here on the same date. It was denied in November. I think, actually, he did pretty well. I think he got four or five votes even without doing a whole lot. We then went to Council and I don't remember when in the last few months. I kind of loss it when I got up there, and I said we're just not going to make it. I need to get it back where it started. Because I would like to have your approval before I go back up to them. I understand that I don't necessarily need it. I'm going there anyway. But I would prefer to have it. So, here we are. It is twice the acreage. We're not trying to cram anything in there. Mr. Kurpiel is from New York and I try not to hold that against him. He is a personal friend of mine but he wasn't there long. When he turned 18, he was drafted into the major leagues. He played ball for, I think the St. Louis Cardinals and some how he ends up on the New York Mets, and then a leg injury, ends up on our Tides. He played for them for many years and some how he ends up driving a UPS truck, because they were over near the Tides Park, somehow he got into that. Long story short, he has been here 15 years. They don't want to go anywhere. All they want to do is build back there. Right behind it is woods all around it with the exception of the developments that have been allowed. I can't think of it but it is Newstead Drive. But there is eight foot fence all the way around this thing. It is very well lighted. I don't think it is going to have an impact on anybody. There may be opposition here today, and if there is, I am not aware of it. If there is, I will try to speak to whatever there issue might be. There has been recently, I think it is Mathews Green. It is a development of 50 houses, which actually is going to the 25 of the 50 acres that is right across the street from this. I don't know when they're going in but they have been approved. They are half-acre lots in short because they left half of it open for open space, woods or whatever we call it. So, those are actually half-acre lots. The good news is that the four that are right there across the street are going to point the other way. He is going to see the backs of them. Princess Anne will be shifted so I'm informed this way that this becomes a cul-de-sac, and that will be the last house on the left. And incidentally, we are receptive to doing. I know that we are suppose to have our stuff kind of together, and here is what it is we want to do, but we just want it done. We're receptive to changing that line or moving it out or move in or move it around. We'll go back to the other driveway. We don't care. We just want to get this thing done. So, we're not actually dead set on that. I personally felt that was a better way of getting in and out then going across the other driveway. We'll put up bushes or buffers or whatever you want. If you want some nice brick columns with lights on them, I'll stick some of those out. Whatever it takes. Here in short order, that is going to be the dead end. That is the last house on the left. And, he has expended a lot of money to get here. Just to get here and it is not over. We've got to go through Council and hopefully get it approved there, and there is, I'm sure, engineering and whatever else we have to do. So, it costs him too. I would shutter to say that I know maybe it is not a hardship, in terms of the Planning Department's perspective that he could just cut that thing in half and have two lots. I'm sure that is a hardship. If that man is going to have to tear that house down, it is a hardship. It is a big hardship. So, there you have it. That is all that I have. Item #11 Edward A. Kurpiel, Jr. and Kathleen T. Kurpiel Page 3 Barry Knight: On these two lots, I can understand your client evidentially wants to stay here and stay in this area. Why doesn't he stay in the house that he is in? If it is approved, what is he going to do with the existing house? Jim Lam: He will sell it. The reason is because it is too big. It is downsize. The new one will be much smaller. He is on the verge of retiring. I think he is only a year or two away from retiring. He has seniority over there. They will be glad to get rid of him anyway. They want to get a new guy in. Anyway, he is a short timer. It will need a much smaller house. I can't remember the second question. Barry Knight: Well, you've answered them both. Jim Lam: Okay. Barry Knight: Mr. Strange, we don't have any other speakers on this do we? Joseph Strange: No. We have no other speakers. Barry Knight: Okay. Are there any other questions for Mr. Lam? Mr. Bernas? Jay Bernas: If you read the staff recommendations, basically one of the reasons they don't support the application is how the hardship is defined. I think you spoke about it briefly. So, you're saying from the applicant's perspective, the hardship is by dividing the lot in half, the applicant doesn't want tear down the house. So, that is basically the only hardship? Jim Lam: From what I can think of sir, I can't find one that would comply with that I could come in here and argue that would apply from your perspective that would be the hardship. But, I guess, to me the hardship, personally would be that I got better than two acres. I've got lots all around them that are half acres. That is an eight-foot fence that runs along the back end and all the way down the side. This is a church on the right and it is just woods. Nobody is going to see it. It is just a giant lot in terms of what the size of the ones we are ordinary cutting out. So, to me, the hardship is I'm going to end up with twice, two lots, that both are over twice the minimum. The only thing that we lack is that road frontage. So, it is a long winded answer to your question. No sir, I don't have any good reason other than that. It would cost him a fortune. If he were to do that, then he would just have to settle somewhere else. It is not going to work. Unfortunately, he may have to do. Barry Knight: Mr. Horsley. Mr. Lam? Mr. Horsley has some questions. Jim Lam: Yes sir. Item #11 Edward A. Kurpiel, Jr. and Kathleen T. Kurpiel Page 4 Donald Horsley: Mr. Lam? I guess the ironic thing is that probably when this property was subdivided somebody wanted that large lot. They wanted that two-acre lot. That is reason why it was subdivided into an two-acre lot. That is what really scares me about some of these large lots that we have. The further south we get, you know the three-acre parcels than when things come in, just like this, the property behind him has been subdivided into half-acre lots. And then all of a sudden you got a large piece of property that is probably bigger than what is normal for the community now, and, so; what was a one dwelling lot looks like it is big enough for at least two dwellings and possibly even more. I'm concerned about the precedent that we would be setting for other activities like this. I understand what you're saying about Mr. Kurpiel wanting to downsize and all. This is what the problem I see. When these lots were subdivided back years, we want a large lot. People know that I'm an advocate of not building houses on too large a lot because we had this problem come about in the future. This is probably a situation that has arise over the years, and probably rightfully so. I mean, you can give justification for doing it because what has encompassed him but what concerns me is what will happen down the road when we get these lots a little further down the road that are three-acre lots. All of a sudden they are surrounded by half-acre lots, and now these people will say, golly, let's divide this up into three or four home sites. We don't want to have these problems. I'm sympathetic to you in one aspect but as I look down the road, I see other problems that could possibly arise. I wasn't here back in November but, again, I guess I intend to agree with what decision was made in November. There really is no hardship. I guess, if he likes the area but he doesn't like the area. If he could find a smaller site, it would be within the area that would be to his benefit. I guess, we look for a hardship when we make these variances, and I guess, we don't really see one other than the need to downsize it and get a smaller lot. Do you understand where I'm coming from? Don't get augmentative. Jim Lam: My unique reaction was just deny the others when they're asking for them down the road just to approve mine. I don't know why they remain the way they are. The lot we're looking at actually went over. Three or four years ago when I was here with a lady that owned that piece. They severed it off and gave it to her so she could use the barn for horse, but I did something so the horse could stay there. Donald Horsley: I remember that. Jim Lam: So, I don't know why they did that. It was the Whites. The Weavers. They owned pretty much all of that stuff. They were family. They cut it off to pieces. They might have even given the church what they got. I don't know what is behind it. Ijust know what we're trying to do today, and I understand your point fully. I can't argue it. I go with this mess that is all around. They are little one. I know it was a big one, and now we're trying to make it into a smaller one and were still going to be twice as big as the ones that are all over created around it. I guess, I have to go at it a different angle to get where you're at, but, I can't argue with you directly sir. Item #11 Edward A. Kurpiel, Jr. and Kathleen T. Kurpiel Page 5 Barry Knight: Mr. Henley has a question for you. Al Henley: Actually, it is going to be a comment. I kind of have a tendency to agree with what Don is saying. In the past, we've looked at neighborhoods. There seems to be a growing trend that you have these older neighborhoods. Trentwood is the first one that comes to mind and Thalia is another one that comes to mind, where you have these larger lots, large homes. People coming in and purchasing the home and wanting to subdivided them and building a house either up front or in the rear for many a child who are to sell for a promise when they get paid for the original purchase. It seems to be a growing tend to do that. Most people today, young executives they want large homes and ocean stamped lots because it is easier maintenance. They don't want to spend their entire weekend mowing grass and trimming hedges. That sort of thing. But, once again, once we do that in the older neighborhoods, the character of the neighborhoods where they were originally developed has a tendency to change. And, especially, I think we can call this a neighborhood. It is not a Trentwood. It is not a Thalia but it is becoming a close- knit neighborhood. One question that I had of you Mr. Lam, and I know there is a development proposed directly across the street. Those developers told me that they had intended to build some possible housing for individuals 65 or older. To your knowledge, has your client been approached by those people that those conditions may be available to him or would be more accommodating to him because of his retirement? Jim Lam: Not to my knowledge. Al Henley: That is all that I have. Barry Knight: Is there anyone else? Mr. Crabtree? Eugene Crabtree: Just one comment also. We have approved flag lots allover this city. We have approved things that have been almost right on top of the property line in some instances in other parts of the city. I was in favor of subdividing it before. I'm still in favor of it. I'm not going to change my opinion over four months. It may not be a hardship, in that case, as far as all the rules of hardships are concerned. I hate to see someone have to go through the expense of tearing down a house and rebuilding it just so he can build a second house. We have things that look similar to allover the city that we approved. My point of view, I have no problem approving this application even though it doesn't conform to the rules of the road. As I said, I voted for it before and I'm going to vote for it now. Barry Knight: Thank you Mr. Crabtree. Are there any other questions for Mr. Lam at this time? Thank you sir. Jim Lam: I like your comments. I hope I do better than Mr. Kurpiel did by himself. Item # 11 Edward A. Kurpiel, Jr. and Kathleen T. Kurpiel Page 6 Barry Knight: There are no more questions. I'll kind of pick up a little where Gene left off. I do agree Don and Al that I would hate to see these 3, 4, or 5-acre lots down in the county subdivided and somebody wanting to come in and subdivide them. But this is actually on the other side of the Transition Area. This is what we call the City. It is buffered tremendously. It is going to be the end of a cul-de-sac now, pretty shortly, I think. It is not going to be a thoroughfare. No one is going to see it. It is going to be a larger lot. Like you said, twice as much as the half-acre lots around there. A key component also is there is no opposition. Evidentially, none of his neighbors oppose. It has been before us now, evidentially this is the third time and there has been no opposition. I know where the gentleman lives because evidentially he is going through the long hard fight because of it. He has got a large house and he wants to downsize for whatever reason. He is getting older. He doesn't want to clean it or whatever. So, I certainly see the reasoning behind it. I don't think it is going to set a precedent. I'm going to be in support of it myself. Is there any other discussion? Mr. Bernas? Jay Bernas: Can Ijust ask staff a quick question? Not that it matters anyway on anybody's decision. But, it almost appears that the lot that has the larger frontage, I guess that is 195, wouldn't it be more advantageous to the applicant to narrow the flag. Because essentially you could probably create two more lots with the other lot. It looks like. Leslie Bonilla: I guess, I want to make sure that I know what you're talking about. You said narrow it? Jay Bernas: Well, narrow the flag. I think it is 46 feet. Because I think the proposed large lot has 195 feet. You need 100 feet oflot width. You can make each one of those 100 each, and then narrow that one flag, and then you end up with three lots. I don't know. It is just a point either way. That is something that could potentially come down the pipe without having to come to Planning Commission, if they did that, as well. Barry Knight: Mr. Whitney? Jack Whitney: Yes sir. Barry Knight: On this application, I don't know where it is going. But, if it goes for a vote to approve it, is there a different configuration you would like better than this one? Jack Whitney: We would like to get as close to compliance to the subdivision ordinance as we can get, which would in this case would mean wider lot width. Barry Knight: That looks harder to do, I guess with the house in the garage in there. That is probably as wide as you can get. Jack Whitney: It is close to it. Item # 11 Edward A. Kurpiel, Jr. and Kathleen T. Kurpiel Page 7 Barry Knight: Okay. Thank you. Is there any other discussion? Ms. Anderson? Janice Anderson: This is a real hard one because it can be divided into two lots. But, I don't think it qualifies for the criteria that we have to look at. If, it was divided the lot line right on the side of the house, and you have about 95-foot frontage and another, I would be saying okay. I would give a variance for 5 feet or something. But, you would have to divide the garage from the house. Now, I don't know if the gentleman wants to do that but I would have a lot easier time approving something on that. But, having it this way with the flag lot, I don't believe it qualifies as a hardship. The area is a rectangular piece of property. His hardship is if he had to do it, he would have to take down that house. That is a financial hardship. We've seen it before where they want to divide up the property because they have area, and they want to one member in front, and the area works but there is no hardship there. I think that is why we deny people before, and I think he would fall into the same category. But, I have a little easier time if it was just a variance of five feet because I think he has got the frontage. He has the frontage on the property to divide it. But, as it is portrayed now, I would have to deny it. Barry Knight: Mr. Redmond? David Redmond: Very briefly. I concur with Ms. Anderson. The reason I do is, I think I always try to be sympathetic to people who want to make the best use of their property. In this case, I think we have to try to take this term "undo hardship" seriously. This is something that he wants to do. But, I don't know if I would necessarily define it as an undo hardship, if he is unable to do it. I don't know the man. I wish him the very best. But I think those words have to have some meaning beyond it is more convenient if he is able to divide it. I was just struggling with that because obviously he is facing retirement. He and his wife is facing retirement and they want to make the best of the assets and the resources that they have going into that. We don't take that terribly seriously then, I'm not sure that the ordinance has a whole lot of meaning. So, this is the first time that I've seen this. I'm coming into this cold without the history that you all would have had with it back in November or December. I am just kind of leaning towards, well not leaning, but I am aware of Mr. Horsley, and Mr. Henley, and Ms. Anderson in that regard. You can't quite get over that. I'm going to oppose it. Barry Knight: Thank you Mr. Redmond. Is there any discussion? The Chair will entertain a motion. Donald Horsley: I make a motion that the application be denied. David Redmond: Second. Barry Knight: Okay. There is a motion on the floor to deny by Don Horsley and seconded by Dave Redmond. Is there any other discussion? I'll call for the question. Item #11 Edward A. Kurpiel, Jr. and Kathleen T. Kurpiel Page 8 AYE 7 NAY 3 ABSO ABSENT 1 ANDERSON AYE BERNAS AYE CRABTREE NAY HENLEY AYE HORSLEY AYE KATSIAS AYE KNIGHT NAY LIVAS NAY REDMOND AYE STRANGE AYE WOOD ABSENT Ed Weeden: By a vote 01'7-3, the application of Edward A. Kurpiel, Jr. and KatWeen T. Kurpiel has been denied. Barry Knight: Thank you. - 36- Item V.K.2. PLANNING ITEM # 56205 Upon motion by Vice Mayor Jones, seconded by Council Lady Wilson, City Council DEFERRED until the City Council Session of March 27, 2007, Ordinances upon application of VALUE PLACE REAL ESTATE SERVICES, LLC. for a Modification of Proffers to allow a change of use from an office/warehouse facility to the development of a hotel (Conditional Change of Zoning approved on February 28,2006) and a Conditional Use Permitfor a hotel: ORDINANCE UPON APPLICATION OF VALUE PLACE REAL ESTATE SERVICES, L.L.C. FOR A MODIFICATION OF PROFFERS Ordinance upon application of Value Place Real Estate Services, L.L.C. for a Modification of Proffers approved by City Council on February 28, 2006. Property is located at 1357 Diamond Springs Road (GPIN 1469009994). DISTRICT 4 - BAYSIDE AND, ORDINANCE UPON APPLICATION OF VALUE PLACE REAL ESTATE SERVICES, L.L.C. FORA CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A HOTEL Ordinance Application of Value Place Real Estate Services, L.L.C.for a Conditional Use Permit for a hotel on property located at 1357 Diamond Springs Road (GPIN 1469009994). DISTRICT 4 - BAYSIDE Voting: 11-0 (By Consent) Council Members Voting Aye: William R "Bill" DeSteph. Harry E. Diezel, Robert M Dyer, Barbara M Henley. Vice Mayor Louis R Jones. Reba S. McClanan. Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorj. John E. Uhrin. Ron A. Villanueva. Rosemary Wilson and James L. Wood Council Members Voting Nay: None Council Members Absent: None March 13, 2007 -46 - Item V.1.5. PLANNING ITEM # 56246 Upon motion by Vice Mayor Jones, seconded by Councilman Dyer, City Council DEFERRED until the City Council Session of May 22, 2007. Ordinances upon application of VALUE PLACE REAL ESTATE SERVICES, LLC. for a Modification of Proffers to allow a change of use from an officelwarehouse facility to the development of a hotel (approved on February 281 2006) and a Conditional Use Permit for a hotel: ORDINANCE UPON APPLICATION OF VALUE PLACE REAL ESTATE SERVICES, L.L.C. FOR A MODIFICATION OF PROFFERS Ordinance upon application of Value Place Real Estate Services, L.L.C. for a Modification of Proffers approved by City Council on February 28, 2006. Property is located at J 357 Diamond Springs Road (GPlN 1469009994). DISTRICT 4 - BAYSIDE AND, ORDINANCE APPLICATION OF VALUE PLACE REAL ESTATE SERVICES, L.L.C. FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A HOTEL Ordinance Application of Value Place Real Estate Services, L.L.C.for a Conditional Use Permit for a hotel on property located at J 357 Diamond Springs Road (GPIN 1469009994). DISTRICT 4 - BAYSIDE Voting: 11-0 (By Consent) Council Members Voting Aye: William R. "Bill" DeSteph, Harry E. Diezel, Robert M Dyer, Barbara M HenleYI Vice Mayor Louis R. Jones, Reba S. McClanan, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf, John E. Uhrin. Ron A. Villanueva. Rosemary Wilson and James 1. Wood Council Members Voting Nay: None Council Members Absent: None March 27, 2007 ..~~ fll';'-I.~'-:~ ~! .- ~~~ \~\~ ijJ L(.~:~..~:.::=t "'~~o;:,~ CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: a) Application of Value Place Real Estate Services, L.L.C. for a Modification of Proffers approved by City Council on February 28, 2006. Property is located at 1357 Diamond Springs Road (GPIN 1469009994). DISTRICT 4 - BAYSIDE b) Application of Value Place Real Estate Services, L.L.C. for a Conditional Use Permit for a hotel on property located at 1357 Diamond Springs Road (GPIN 1469009994). DISTRICT 4 - BAYSIDE MEETING DATE: May 22, 2007 . Background: A Conditional Rezoning from B-2 Community Business District to 1-1 Light Industrial District was approved by the City Council on February 28, 2006. The purpose of the rezoning was to allow redevelopment of the site for office- warehouse facilities for Tank Lines. The site is now being proposed for a hotel, which necessitates modification of the 2006 proffers, as they tied that rezoning to a specific site plan for the office-warehouse facility. On March 13, 2007, the City Council deferred these applications to allow the applicant time to meet with the Northwest Beach Partnership, who had requested such an opportunity. On March 27, 2007 I the applicant requested a deferral of these applications to the May 22 meeting, as the applicant desired additional time to address issues of the surrounding communities and business area. The applicant has since submitted revisions to the proffers and building elevations (revisions to the proffers are listed in the attached staff report). . Considerations: The applicant proposes to redevelop the subject site for a 121 unit limited service hotel. The applicant has emphasized to staff that its hotels focus on providing a quality, low-cost hotel alternative, and the choice of the subject site is designed to meet that need in this area, which is predominantly devoted to transportation and warehousing. The hotel will offer lodging to drivers of long-distance trucks, to sales representatives doing business with firms in the immediate area, as well as general travelers. Staff, therefore, concludes that the hotel will provide a needed service in this area. The proposal is well-organized and configured to promote safe and functional on- site access and circulation. The proposed hotel use and accompanying modification to the proffered covenants and development restrictions are Value Place Real Estate Services, L.L.C. Page 2 of 2 consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's land use development policies established for this area. The hotel's exterior is a simple traditional design using a "Hardiplank" lap siding in two complementary colors with mullioned windows. The building will be four stories in height, topped with a gable end asphalt composition shingled roof. Since the March 27 deferral. the buildinQ elevation has been revised to include areas of brick that serve to break UP the expanse of Hardiplank. The proposed site design for the hotel utilizes the required stonnwater management facility as an entrance feature with fountains fronting along Diamond Springs Road. The hotel is situated centrally on the lot with parking along the sides and rear of the hotel. An existing buffer of trees along the rear of the property will be maintained. The Planning Commission placed the items on the consent agenda because they concluded the use is a quality complementary use in the area, the proposal is consistent with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan, and there was no opposition to the request. . Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 10-0 to approve the requests, as proffered. . Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement Planning Commission Minutes Location Map Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends approval. ~ Submitting DeparbnentlAgency: Planning Department City Manager:~ II 'C6W"i VALUE PLACE REAL ESTATE SERVICES, LLC Agenda Items 6 & 7 February 14, 2007 Public Hearing Staff Planner: Karen Prochilo REQUEST: 6) Modification of Proffers from the Conditional Change of Zoning from B-2 Community Business District. to Conditional 1-1 Industrial District. granted by the City Council on February 28, 2006. 7) Conditional Use Pennit for a hotel. ADDRESS / DESCRIPTION: Property located at 1357 Diamond Springs Road. GPIN: 14691009070000 COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT: 4 - BA YSIDE SITE SIZE: 2.399 Acres SUMMARY OF REQUEST A Conditional Rezoning from B-2 Community Business District to 1-1 Light Industrial District. was approved by the City Council on February 28,2006. The Conditional Rezoning has two (2) proffers: 1. When the property is developed, in order to achieve a coordinated design and development on the site in terms of vehicular access, parking, building orientation, building appearance and landscaping, the conceptual site plan and building elevations entitled "NEW SHELL OFFICE - WAREHOUSE BUILDING TANK LINES, Virginia Beach, Virginia" (pages 1 and 2), dated 8/30/2005, prepared by Lyall Design Architects, which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning ("Conceptual Plan") shall be substantially adhered to. 2. Further conditions may be required by the Grantee during detailed Site Plan review and administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City Agencies and Departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements. . ". -.-' .. . .. "...' . ."' .-. .... .... . .... VALUE PLACE REAL ESTATE ~1F:R.;VtCES~:)~LC Ager9~Jtem~'~'::~7;.," "/.'.;;e~g~.:1 Proffer 1 describes a site plan and building elevations for an office warehouse. This proffer is requested for modification to accommodate a new proposal to build a hotel on this site. The proposed site design for the hotel utilizes the required stormwater management facility as an entrance feature with fountains fronting along Diamond Springs Road. The hotel is situated centrally on the lot with parking along the sides and rear of the hotel. An existing buffer of trees along the rear of the property will be maintained. The hotel's exterior is a simple traditional design using a "Hardiplank" lap siding in two complementary colors with mullioned windows. The building will be four stories in height, topped with a gable end asphalt composition shingled roof. The proposed 121-unit limited service hotel will operate 365 days a year, 24 hours a day. An employee will be available on-site at all times to serve customers and to oversee day-to-day operations. A manager's office will be open Monday through Friday during the day and on Saturdays half a day. LAND USE AND ZONING INFORMATION EXISTING LAND USE: Commercial site with paved parking. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: South: East: . Office-warehouse 11-1 Light Industrial District . Retail 1 B-2 Community Business District . Across Diamond Springs Road is an office building 1 B-2 Community Business District . Warehouse 11-1 Light Industrial District West: NATURAL RESOURCE AND CULTURAL FEATURES: There are no significant natural resources or cultural features associated with this site. AICUZ: The site is in an AICUZ of less than 65 dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. IMPACT ON CITY SERVICES MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN (MTP) / CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP): Diamond Springs Road in the vicinity of this application is considered a four-lane divided minor suburban arterial. The Master Transportation Plan proposes a six-lane divided facility within a 150 foot right-of-way. No Capital Improvement Program projects are slated for this area. One ingress/egress access point is proposed in the same location as the existing entrance. . . .-. '. . .... .. .--. . .. . ... .. . . -.. . ... ..... ....... ........... VALUE PLACE REAL ESTATE g€:R.i.VICES~)~LC. Age~9aJtem~'p:::~.7 " . ... ;g~9~::4 ... . ... . TRAFFIC: Street Name Present Present Capacity Generated Traffic Volume Diamond Springs 31,698 ADT 1 28,200 ADT (Level of Existing Land Use L - Road Service "Cl 50 ADT 30,600 ADT 1 (Level of Proposed Land Use 3 - Service "D") I capacity 880 ADT 32,800 ADT 1 (Level of 41 AM Peak Hour Service. "E") Vehicles (entering) 45 PM Peak Hour Vehicles (entering) Average Dally Tnps 2 as defined by existing office I storage 3 as defined by hotel - limited services Traffic Engineering may have some concerns with the precise entrance location. This concern can be addressed during site plan review through DSC. WATER: This site must connect to City water. There is a 12-inch City water main on Diamond Springs Road. SEWER: This site must connect to City sanitary sewer. Analysis of Pump Station 326 and the sanitary sewer collection system is required to ensure future flows can be accommodated. There are two 10-inch City sanitary sewer gravity mains on Diamond Springs Road. HRSD: There is a 20-inch and 48-inch HRSD force main on Diamond Springs Road fronting the site. FIRE & EMERGENCY SERVICES: No comment at this time. The Fire Department comments will be provided during the site plan review process. POLICE DEPARTMENT: Provide a photometric plan during site plan review. All lighting on the site should be consistent with those standards recommended by the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America. EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of this request with the submitted proffer provided below. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan recognizes this area as being within Strategic Growth Area 1. Development proposals in this major eVOlving employment corridor must demonstrate a commitment to design and materials especially when viewed from adjacent major thoroughfares, Northampton Boulevard and Diamond Springs Road. Evaluation: The proposed hotel will provide a needed service for this area, which is predominantly devoted to transportation and warehousing, as the hotel will offer lodging to drivers of long-distance trucks, to sales representatives doing business with firms in the immediate area, as well as general travelers. The ....... .. VALUE PLACE REAL ESTATE ~:r::.:F1.VICES~:)lLC. Age~9a.ltems~:::~7"" :;,' .., .:e~g~:~ . . .. ... ," .... .. .- ,... . . . . .. . . . - .. ..' . . . .... ,". applicant has emphasized to staff that its hotels focus on providing a quality, low-cost alternative to other hotels, and the choice of the subject site is designed to meet that need in this area. staff concludes that this proposal is well-organized and configured to promote safe and functional on-site access and circulation. The proposed hotel use and accompanying modification to the proffered covenants and development restrictions are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's land use development policies established for this area. PROFFERS The following are proffers submitted by the applicant as part of a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA). The applicant, consistent with Section 107(h) ofthe City Zoning Ordinance, has voluntarily submitted these proffers in an attempt to "offset identified problems to the extent that the proposed rezoning is acceptable," (~107(h)(1)). Should this application be approved, the proffers will be recorded at the Circuit Court and serve as conditions restricting the use of the property as proposed with this change of zoning. PROFFER 1: With respect to the existing Proffered Covenants, Restriction and Conditions ("Proffer") set forth in an Agreement by and between Tank Lines, Inc., a Virginia corporation, and the City of Virginia Beach, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia, dated August 29, 2005 and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Virginia Beach, Virginia as Instrument Number 20060308000354540 on March 8, 2005, Proffer 1 as set forth in page 2 of the Agreement is terminated and the remaining Proffers as set forth in the Agreement shall remain. PROFFER 2: A four-story hotel facility shall be constructed on the site as shown on the site plan ("Site Plan") attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit A and will not exceed sixty-five (65) feet in height. In addition, the front yard of the hotel will be landscaped with a fountain and plantings. PROFFER 3: The architectural design elements shall be generally as shown on the elevation rendering prepared by Howard & Helmer attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit B. The hotel facility shall be constructed with brick and hardi-plank fa98de on all four sides of the building and will include shutters on all windows with faux balconies as shown on the rendering. The rear elevation shall be similar to the front elevation with articulation ofthe walls and includes an entrance with a canopy. The side elevations shall include single door secured entrances. Materials are depicted on the Materials Board prepared by Howard & Helmer. Elevations and materials will be subject to review and approval by Director of Planning. PROFFER 4: The site will have a single entrance as shown on the Site Plan. PROFFER 5: A ten foot (10') landscape buffer will be constructed on the sides of the hotel which borders the real property now owned by CRM, LLC and Tank Lines, Inc. and a twenty foot (20) landscape buffer will be constructed on the back of the hotel which borders the real property now owned by J&E of VA, LTD. The Applicant will preserve all existing trees to the extent possible. All green areas, including the area around the fountain, weill well landscaped with mature deciduous shade trees and shrubs, and will include native plants like dogwoods, pines, hollies (but not including crape myrtles), and maintained on a regular basis. The existing trees in the area to the be developed that become diseased or die shall be replaced with healthy trees, VALUE PLACE REAL ESTATE ~~:F{;VICES~)~LC Ageti9a.Jtems9::~.7,. . ':.eijg~.4 .. .. .". . subject to review and approval by the Director of Planning. PROFFER 6: The Applicant shall cause the installation and operation of video equipment with recording devices and capability sufficient to include date and time that recording is made (t~e "Equipment"). The video equipment shall provide high quality surveillance coverage encompassing the entrance to the facility and the parking lot as well as other building interior locations. The Applicant shall maintain the Equipment to provide for the required surveillance coverage. The Equipment will be maintained on a regular basis in an effort to provide clear and sharp images and the Applicant will regularly replace tapes that become damaged and defective. The Equipment and recordings made thereby shall be subject to periodic inspection by the Police Department at reasonable times and acceptance of the conditions of this pennit shall constitute consent for such inspections. The surveillance tapes or recorded data must be maintained in a condition pennitting review of the infonnation stored or recorded therein or thereon for a period of time no less than thirty days after the date that the recording or surveillance is made. PROFFER 7: Two (2) employees of the Applicant will be present and available on site to serve customers, to oversee day to day operations, and to provide security. Applicant will provide on site security 24 hours daily. Applicant will utilize the Safe Program which in part, mandates that hotel guests will sign a waiver and release which allows Applicant to share the hotel guests' name and identification number with the Police Department. PROFFER 8: The Applicant agrees that no hotel room shall be rented for less than a seven (7) day period and no guest shall be pennitted to occupy a room for a period exceeding thirty (30) consecutive days. PROFFER 9: The Applicant agrees that there shall be no more than four guests pennitted to occupy a room designed to accommodate four guests. Similarly, no more than two guests will be pennitted to occupy a room designed to accommodate two guests. PROFFER 10: Interior and exterior lighting will be provided to the maximum extent allowed by the Virginia Beach Zoning Ordinance and will include lighting at all security camera locations. Further conditions may be required by the Grantee during detailed Site Plan review and administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City Agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements. STAFF COMMENTS: The modified proffers listed above are acceptable as they continue to dictate the level of quality of the project and ensure its consistency with the Comprehensive Plan recommendations. The City Attorney's Office has reviewed the amendment to the proffer agreement dated November 1, 2006, and found it to be legally sufficient and in acceptable legal fonn. .. . ". n.... . ...,. VALUE PLACE REAL ESTATE ~gR:.VICES~ilLC .. Age~9aJtems'9::;~7". , . ." :e;~~.~:.R... NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. Plans submitted with this rezoning application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes and Standards. The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. VALUE PLACE REAL ESTATE ~:~'RVICES~)lLC Age~9~J~7~~~1:t.~' '...... .."'...:,:.:.:::,Jl,:.::.,::..:,,'.,,...:: .. .. . .. AERIAL OF SITE LpeAJION.. . -' -.' ..... '.. . . ,'" ," -,' . ',',,:. : ,,,,', ." '.'- .......,. .-'-. ," .. ......, "",,' .. '.. ......... . .. .. ..... C' . . ". . .. ..." .'. .'. ....'.,' ',' . ,.,....'. -',' . . '" ," .... ,"-' VALUE PLACE REAL ESTATE ~.g:RVICES~}lLC Agerc.;ta Jtem~B::~~7 ',... , ...' .....13~9~.Z.,' .}' :J....;:...........' .~,..,(, .... O'A?~SHNilii~;:d;K~lU' .....r.-.--. M_.""_...........,._-"'M.--~--"..,.l-l::.,.. ~. . ~ , ! ~; .:.:~ ::: ,;:: :':"'.',;", .::::: 'Iiil!! :-. ....'.. ::: ,jllb: --:-~. :;:'.i.{~: '~. :"-:;f.:",..:-::':"'" w: :~:: ~~):~. ;;:';:':~': :::.:.; :( "~> .'::: - ~~~ I( Ii to PROPOSED SITE:::PliAN::':::: . . - - ". . ...., ... . . .... " - - . .,. ... . ---. . ..' ...'. ..,..... ..:..':.:.'.: .:.::-:.-,::,',...':,.......:...;>-:;::.:':.:.:=:.:-:.;:.;:;'; VALUE PLACE REAL ESTATE gIF.:F{VICES::.ilLC Age~9~JtemSB:::~7., , ,.'. ..'. :'::"'R:$'9~:~.,. .. . "''''''1 I [ r ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ,~ ~. ~ ~~., ......~ :=u ~-< w~ "".= J< ~;oooc . z ~'~ ~c ~~ ~~ >:> ::: I ~. ..... ~, ....::: .-. .;:.;. ~i ~:-;:- !. ...... .:: il!l PROPOSED BUILDING ELEYAjlClN$:.' .. . _,' _n' '_,';', '..... ,_ 'n ........ "' ,.- .. .. .. ". .. . .-, .,. ..... -,.... .' . - .. . - ' ,",. ..... . ',' . :;' :".':'; ;. . '. :.: .. . . . . . : ':-- - :::: . ::'; :;.; :-~-;. -:. .': . ' . VALUE PLACE REAL ESTATE 9~I1.VIGES~:i~LG Ag~~~.lti0~1.;./ 1 02/28/06 Conditional Rezoning from B-2 to 1-1 Granted 2 04/11/00 Conditional Use Permit (communications facility) Granted 3 12/08/98 Conditional Use Permit (automobile repair Qarage) Granted 4 06/24/97 Street Closure Granted 5 08/27/91 Conditional Use Permit (recreational facilitv) Granted 6 09/11/89 Conditional Rezoning from B-2 to 1-1 Denied 7 09/11/89 Subdivision Variance Granted 8 02/27/89 Conditional Rezoning from R-5D to B-2 Granted . ... . . . .. . . . . ... . .. ... .. .. ..... ... . ZONING HISTORY:::::::: . . . . .. ... . . . . H' .... . .. '... . t! 1\;1 III H:H Uil II l~ m~ mIll iil li-:~~: .i:: ..~:-.::;- .::0......::: :;~ .f~~ 1 ~::.~}. .~. ..' " r ~ ~! ":: :\ ~~-~ .(~:' .,~{ . '.:~ .:.c '....-~.n. ~.?i .~~:~.: .~':-~:.~~ .ill .,...,.... ..... """'-1'" '" ~::~ '.: ljk~:ili i:~i, k n< .;~, .'" <" ,. ," ,',' .~ ...............-"'....~,..'""............. . . i Ilil : ll~~ ~L.....-.j .~ ':::, ~1.1 i.J.1.~ l~~ li';;', ~.".,,::.:.,~J~"'l ~""~;.t ,;,/::+il.t::;m! . ,~.~ .~:......:. ._'';'. "_':-:~'9'. ..v.,,,""_' :. L.- ...,L~~Ul<~J NOIIV:Jl1ddV lIWllld9iSn 1VNOWaN03 .~.....,........................~_.... : .............._........... .....n..........u. . . .' . . . ., . . . ., . J... ..........H... !!'^~.. F':<<O>>:~~ ::: :~ I~ i [l@; I~I :n~J :~:::J ~. :~<h ~, ,I.ii L~..j: " (" ~,j~. ::.~1.:~::: ,~.!.~ :':)'.." 'n (fJ_~'1-~ ~:}:.g- < ~:. :-:.: I ;~ ::~: (J :g" ~: ,"' : : o'E:~ ~::~. ~- ~ t1E ;:.;. 1:" .,;;}:-:.' :~, ::.00': ~ -;- ~JI ~ F~ : . r.:......~~..~u~1. ~::::.. I "'~, .~ ~ l . J~ ..~ ~" '~r ~~:.;; ...... ~. ~' . l ~~ll ,~ .~ ~~ I i '" :~~~ ~ ~.:;.~- i~i" ~~~:: ~ I !llji 'YYO.......'\.......,..<<";.~ II .. ~'~. ;i ::.::? I!l'~. l~l'i itl 1"1.."'-;.... y.':'.. VALUE PLACE REAL ESTATE s'E:RV1GES:::LLC Ag9l1~~J\~~~'lj , ~~: '~'~..:' W I~ .:: : ~.., . ':-1 f :'~:::::',.':.: ~:::, :~ . !~ H : I .~ ~.'~: ~ ;.:": ~ ~. '~ ~. .j~_: ~.~ !?., ",~ ~~,';,' .~ :.~: ~ ';:" -,.., ;~~ ~~~~ ~.~.~,l, I::: .:!~. ',.~~. : . ~:~~: v n - ~~. .i: _ '.~ :::: :$..." " 0:.' ,-; ::;;.: . .~ . \'.. ~.' ,~2,.::.;.:.,. ' -. ~. ~ : U ~ ~i liH f~.:~. 1-....: f:,~ ,.... .~'" ~:::s ~.,,'~,:.I.. f t ~ ~ 1 .V :,~ .f.~, . t ~; -.~,.~::: .:t.!:., :~ ~." 1 .?i .~. :~:~~.~:: ;::'" z... ~. ~~::; v. 'r.;,~ :t~; :. g~' i: "<::. r,;:~,:.:, ::-,' ~.: :~ .:-.. <...; ....::. J.~, i%. ~ "'.. ._ 'i' ~ J ~ ~ ....... ,,' .0.r.:.;!..,. !>t .... ,,^ }.-=, ~..~ ..t_"".~.:~:.::::':,'I",;;.:.' _ :.~.:,'.::,:: lhi :" ~_::,',_::::' ".,:,<<,:.~:~:.::,'~:~,:,~.::l:':.. B~ : 1i, _ .":. f: ~., ". .f,'".:,_i ~.' ;.; ,~t~ ':; '.~ ~ ~ H: _, ~.j.1'1.. ~'h ~J ~'( :(. ( -. ~ .... {,..;::-.;:; ,,"'::"':".~;.': ,- '~.::.: ~.,:: ,:.:. - ,'<-;', . /,:':..'''''J:, i .' ~ ":OJ '~J .......::: :,:. .-- ~ NOI1VJI1dtlVSNOtLIUNO:l dO NOI1VJldlaOW :f: ~ " .., .., ~~ ~ " . '.!$~ :5 ~~ :~ ~ t ~~: ~; :;~~ ~ ~ ':'~ ; ~~ ~~; t1' :~.: :J~~ :t.;~.} ~.;i;1~ [;; ~. J' ,'. ::> .~.:. "- .}j. .~ .~. ;t. ~ € 1;~' ~ :<; .~:~ VALUE PLACE REAL ESTATE g~RVICES~:/~LC Agenda,ltems'~:::~. 7 ,. .,p.~g:~:::1g .. ." - " -". 'V'ALUEPLACJ:LLe OfJkM'S fqr Nkmller;: 'V~H'U~ 12tac~LhC VahlePtn~cRcld'E.'\1tlde Sel'Vic~s :LL.C. Ch~4h';mu.n~ ;hlCKl:\ Ddln~l~ CE,()t Gr~gK<lssl)ver , President: O~vid Redicl"u q~O.~uHI.Se~:n~t<tt'Y: R<it~orSh~f:f~t~ AfS~i$hmtS(:j:reilH')::. ... UinWllg(I(~r Asst$6uH S~(:retM'Y: ""'.' J'IOlt:ltlRichlll'd!wtl A5si~MnfSett'e:t~u}':'" Kevin J~H1tzen S<~j)l<u;' 'Vi('~.l"t~~~d~}IJ~' . - - ..-....... Se.n1QT' V:iee-l:~r~#:ident:~ . ... .-- ,-- --- . OOt}gl~s G.Rupe l)hll\Vhih~ ..........u......~..:.~~-:~~~~~~;. ~;<{~:l. f~.: ::r::'~: Si~:C<::.. ~'<.-_ ~:\~~~<: :~:~{) \V.:_d~::::::.~.- }~.:?:n;:~:~':" i.:;':.?m) (' J; 6..~~;~ 3 . ::: ~~ -:I~t{r:~:::;' . .';+~~..6:j;: : t >:~:~ ::f~ ......."".~........._.......,..........:...:.:.:.:.._.u..'.:.,_'._.._,~_,_~.................n.~..............U.U4....~~....~:' 1;OWCO~T O..KAS "ii, Si\FK ~'B1Ml'.Lg DISCLOSURE ST ~1;f;'M:I::~I1\." . . . VALUE PLACE REAL ESTATE gJE:R.;VICES~.;lLC " Age~~I\~~1s't/i Items #6 & #7 Value Place Real Estate Services, L.L.c. Modification of Proffers Conditional Use Permit 1357 Diamond Springs Road District 4 Bayside February 14,2007 CONSENT Janice Anderson: The next items are agenda items #6 & 7. Those are the applications of Value Place Real Estate Services, L.L.c. This is for a Modification of Proffers that were approved by City Council on February 28, 2006. The property is located at 1357 Diamond Springs Road. It also involves an application for a Conditional Use Permit for a hotel located on the same property. This is in the Bayside District. Mr. Romine? Welcome. Steve Romine: Thank you. Good afternoon. Chairman and members of the Commission, my name is Steve Romine, a local attorney for Value Place. We appreciate being put on the consent agenda. The Modification of Proffers, as recommended by staff is acceptable to us. Janice Anderson: Thank you. Steven Romine: Thank you. Janice Anderson: Is there any objection to these two items being placed on the consent agenda? The Chairman has asked David Redmond to review these applications for us. David Redmond: Mr. Chairman, a Conditional Rezoning from B-2 Community Business District to I-I Light Industrial District was originally approved by the City Council on February 28, 2006. The original application described a site plan and building elevations for an office warehouse. This proffer, which is requested for modification is to accommodate a new proposal to build a hotel on this site. Specifically, a 121 unit limited service hotel that would operate 365 days a year and for 24 hours a day. The proposed site design for the hotel utilizes the required stormwater management facility as an entrance feature with fountains fronting along Diamond Springs Road. The hotel is situated centrally on the lot with parking along the sides and rear of the hotel. An existing buffer of trees along the rear of the property will be maintained. The Commission is unaware of any opposition to this proposal. We believe it would be an attractive addition to this corridor that would further diversify the product in the Bayside District. As a result, we believe was most appropriate for the consent agenda. Thank you. Janice Anderson: Thank you Dave. Mr. Chairman, I have a motion to approve the following items on the consent agenda, They are agenda items 6 and 7. Items #6 & #7 Value Place Real Estate Services, L.L.C. Page 2 Barry Knight: There is a motion on the floor. Mr. Crabtree? There is a motion on the floor to approve the consent agenda item. The motion was made by J an Anderson and seconded by Gene Crabtree. Is there allY discussion? I'll call fur the question. AYE 10 NAY 0 ABSO ABSENT 1 ANDERSON AYE BERNAS AYE CRABTREE AYE HENLEY AYE HORSLEY AYE KA TSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE LIV AS AYE REDMOND AYE STRANGE AYE WOOD ABSENT Ed Weeden: By a vote of 10-0, the Bo.ard has approved items 6 and 7 for consent. CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE In Reply Refer To Our File No. DF-6623 FROM: DATE: May 11, 2007 Leslie L. Lille~ DEPT: City Attorney B. Kay Wi Iso DEPT: City Attorney TO: RE: Conditional Zoning Application: Value Place Real Estate Services, LLC (Tank Lines, Inc.) The above-referenced conditional zoning application is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on May 22,2007. I have reviewed the subject proffer agreement, dated May 10, 2007 and have determined it to be legally sufficient and in proper legal form. A copy of the agreement is attached. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter further. BKW/ks Enclosure -< Cc: Kathleen Hassen TANK LINES, INC., a Virginia Corporation TO (AMENDMENT TO PROFFERED COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS AND CONDITIONS) CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia. THIS SECOND AMENDMENT TO PROFFERED COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS AND CONDITIONS ("Amendment") made this 10th day of May 2007, by and between TANK LINES. INC., a Virginia corporation, its successors in interest or title and its assigns, ("Owner" and "Grantor") (Grantor for indexing purposes), VALUE PLACE REAL ESTATE SERVICES. LLC, its successors in interest or title and its assigns, ("Grantor") (Grantor for indexing purposes), (Tank Lines, Inc. and Value Place Real Estate Services, LLC hereinafter are collectively referred to as "Grantors") and THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia ("Grantee") (Grantee for indexing purposes), provides and states as follows: WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Owner is the oWner of a parcel of real property located in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, containing 2.399 acres ofland commonly referred to as 1357 Diamond Springs Road, Virginia Beach, Virginia, GPIN NO: 1469-00-9994 (formerly GPIN 1469-10- 0907), more particularly described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference ("Property"); WHEREAS, on August 29, 2005 Grantors executed an Agreement of Proffered Covenants, Restrictions and Conditions, which was recorded March 8, 2006 as Instrument Number 20060308000354540 in the Clerk's Office of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia (the "'Proffered Conditions"); and WHEREAS, Grantors and Grantee desire to amend the Proffered Conditions as herein provided in order to allow for the design and development of the Property in accordance with a new conceptual site plan and building elevation. NOW, THEREFORE, the Grantors, its successors, assigns, grantees and other successors in title or interest, voluntarily and without any element of compulsion or quid pro quo for zoning, rezoning, site plan, building permit, or subdivision approval, hereby make the following amendment to the Proffered Conditions which shall restrict and govern the physical development, operation, and use of the Property and hereby covenant and agree that this Amendment shall constitute covenants running with the Property, which shall be binding upon the Property and upon all parties and persons claiming under or through the Grantors, its successors, assigns, grantees and other successors in interest or title: GPIN: 1469-00-9994 (formerly GPIN 1469-10-0907) Prepared by: LeClair Ryan, A Professional Corporation 999 Waterside Drive, Suite 2525 Norfolk, Virginia 23510 1. With respect to the existing Proffered Covenants, Restrictions and Conditions ("Proffer") set forth in an Agreement by and between Tank Lines, Inc., a Virginia corporation, and the City of Virginia Beach, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia, dated August 29, 2005 and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Virginia Beach, Virginia as Instrument Number 20060308000354540 on March 8, 2005, Proffer 1 as set forth in page 2 of the Agreement is terminated and the remaining Proffers as set forth in the Agreement shall remain. 2. A four-story hotel facility shall be constructed on the site as shown on the site plan ("Site Plan") attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit A and will not exceed sixty-five (65) feet in height. In addition, the front yard of the hotel will be landscaped with a fountain and plantings. 3. The architectural design elements shall be generally as shown on the elevation rendering prepared by Howard & Helmer attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit B. The hotel facility shall be constructed with brick and hardi-plank fayade on all four sides of the building and will include shutters on all windows with faux balconies as shown on the rendering. The rear elevation shall be similar to the front elevation with articulation of the walls and includes an entrance with a canopy. The side elevations shall include single door secured entrances. Materials are depicted on the Materials Board prepared by Howard & Helmer. Elevations and materials will be subject to review and approval by Director of Planning. 4. The site will have a single entrance as shown on the Site Plan. 5. A ten foot (10') landscape buffer will be constructed on the sides of the hotel which borders the real property now owned by CRM, LLC and Tank Lines, Inc. and a twenty foot (20') landscape buffer will be constructed on the back of the hotel which borders the real property now owned by J&E of V A, LTD. The Applicant will preserve all existing trees to the extent possible. All green areas, including the area around the fountain, will be well landscaped with mature deciduous shade trees and shrubs, and will include native plants like dogwoods, pines, and hollies (but not including crepe myrtles), and maintained on a regular basis. The existing trees in the area to be developed that become diseased or die shall be replaced with healthy trees, subject to review and approval by the Director of Planning. 6. The Applicant shall cause the installation and operation of video equipment with recording devices and capability sufficient to include date and time that recording is made (the '"Equipment"). The video equipment shall provide high quality surveillance coverage encompassing the entrance to the facility and the parking lot as well as other building interior locations. The Applicant shall maintain the Equipment 2. to provide for the required surveillance coverage. The Equipment will be maintained on a regular basis in an effort to provide clear and sharp images and the Applicant will regularly replace tapes that become damaged and defective. The Equipment and recordings made thereby shall be subject to periodic inspection by the Police Department at reasonable times and acceptance of the conditions of this permit shall constitute consent for such inspections. The surveillance tapes or recorded data must be maintained in a condition permitting review of the information stored or recorded therein or thereon for a period of time no less than thirty days after the date that the recording or surveillance is made. 7. Two (2) employees of the Applicant will be present and available on site to serve customers, to oversee day to day operations, and to provide security. Applicant will provide on site security 24 hours daily. Applicant will utilize the Safe Program which in part, mandates that hotel guests will sign a waiver and release which allows Applicant to share the hotel guests' name and identification number with the Police Department. 8. The Applicant agrees that no hotel room shall be rented for less than a seven (7) day period and no guest shall be permitted to occupy a room for a period exceeding thirty (30) consecutive days. 9. The Applicant agrees that there shall be no more than four guests permitted to occupy a room designed to accommodate four guests. Similarly, no more than two guests will be permitted to occupy a room designed to accommodate two guests. 10. Interior and exterior lighting will be provided to the maximum extent allowed by the Virginia Beach Zoning Ordinance and will include lighting at all security camera locations. Grantors further covenant and agree that: The above amendment having been proffered by Grantors and allowed and accepted by Grantee as part of the amendment to the Zoning Ordinance shall continue in full force and effect until a subsequent amendment changes and zoning of the Property and specifically repeals such conditions. Such conditions shall continue despite a subsequent amendment to the Zoning Ordinance even if the subsequent amendment is part of a comprehensive implementation of a new or substantially revised Zoning Ordinance until specifically repealed. The conditions, however, may be repealed, amended, or varied by written instrument recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and executed by the record owner of the Property at the time of recordation of such instrument, provided that said instrument is consented to by Grantee in writing as evidenced by a certified copy of an ordinance or a resolution adopted by the governing body of Grantee, after a public hearing before Grantee which was advertised pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia, 3. 1950, as amended. Said ordinance or resolution shall be recorded along with said instrument as conclusive evidence of such consent, and if not so recorded, said instrument shall be void. Grantors covenants and agrees that: 1. The Zoning Administrator of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, shall be vested with all necessary authority, on behalf of the governing body of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, to administer and enforce the foregoing conditions and restrictions, including the authority (a) to order, in writing, that any noncompliance with such conditions be remedied, and (b) to bring legal action or suit to insure compliance with such conditions, including mandatory or prohibitory injunction, abatement, damages, or other appropriate action, suit, or proceeding; 2. The failure to meet all conditions and restrictions shall constitute cause to deny the issuance of any of the required building or occupancy permits as may be appropriate; 3. If aggrieved by any decision of the Zoning Administrator, made pursuant to these provisions, Grantors shall petition the governing body for the review thereof prior to instituting proceedings in court; and 4. The Zoning Map may show by an appropriate symbol on the map the existence of conditions attaching to the zoning of the Property, and the ordinances and the conditions may be made readily available and accessible for public inspection in the office of the Zoning Administrator and in the Planning Department, and they shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and indexed in the names of Grantors and Grantee. [SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGES] 4. WITNESS the following signature and seal: GRANTOR: C , a Virginia corporation I (SEAL) COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA CITY OF AI tJ->> f~ Ie , to wit: The foregoing instrument was a:.-knowledge before me this IO+4aYOf MI'L'L , 2006 by ChfA,Ve5 ?5.I1JOclb:oc Ji<. , as HR&~~.J-- of ~, INe., a Virginia corporation, on behalf of said corporation. My Commission Expires: ~ /.,3JJ ) OJ / / Notary ID#: ....?{) X'Lf4~ 5. By: Name: Title: VALUE PLACE REAL ESTATE SERVICES, LLC .J~'oell Manager of Development (SEAL) Services STATE OF ~r'\iQ eOUNTY/CI F ~ot k .. , to wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledge before me this lOth day of May 2007, by ~cn ~rbe\ \ ,as ~ ot-~~~~fValue Place Real Estate Services, LLC, on behalf of said corporation. Notary ID#: ~ lO'1'-\-O My Commission Expires: <=t._~~ "2()\ 0 6 EXHIBIT A PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ALL mAT certain tract, piece or parcel of land~ lying, situate and being in the City. of Virginia Beach, Virginia, d~fV'ated as .PARCEL XLlV-W, on that certain plat entitled "RESUBDMSION OF PARCEL XLIV. AIRPORT INDUSTRIAL PARK - BAYSlDE (MB 116, PG25) AND THE PROPERIY OF CLARA S. MALBON (lnstrnroent No. 200310170169982) Vuginia Beach, Vn-ginia", prepared by Engineering Services, Inc., and duly reco1ded in the Clerk's office of the Circuit Court of the City of Vu-ginia Beach, Vuginia, as Instrument I 2005121500200 1950. 7. Cot1di:iot1r117oning Ch;}nw~: From R.5D to Conditional .'\.74, Conditional 8-4, Condition<<1 A.1.? \virh P[).H2 O\lf:rJay J~t' 1~ (~ (V ~~~i:: ,,,,,~':;' 'r........v'-' CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Application of South Independence Acquisition, L.L.C. for a Change of Zoning District Classification from R-5D and R-10 Residential Districts to Conditional A-36 Apartment District, Conditional B-4 Mixed Use District and Conditional A-12 Apartment District with a PD-H2 Overlay on property located on the southeast and southwest corners of South Independence Boulevard and Princess Anne Road and 1632 Salem Road (GPINs 1485050352; 1485251012; 1475856017). DISTRICT 1 - CENTERVILLE & DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE MEETING DATE: May 22, 2007 . Background: The applicant is requesting a Conditional Change of Zoning for a 133.8-acre parcel commonly referred to as the Spence Farm, generally bordered by Princess Anne Road, Lynnhaven Parkway, S. Independence Boulevard, and Salem Road. The site is currently zoned R-5D Residential allowing a maximum of 803 by-right single-family or duplex dwelling units. . Considerations: On the west side of South Independence Boulevard, the proffered plan and accompanying details submitted by the applicant depict 26.3 acres of Conditional B-4 Mixed Use District for retail, hotel and office use and 84.4 acres to Conditional A-12 Apartment District with a PD-H2 Overlay for the development of 103 single-family dwellings, 347 townhomes and 230 twin town homes. On the east side of South Independence Boulevard, the applicant proposes to rezone 23.1 acres of R-5D Residential District to Conditional A-36 Apartment District for 400 units of apartments and congregate care (senior housing). . Recommendations: The applicant has requested a deferral of this application. . Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement Planning Commission Minutes Location Map Recommended Action: Deferral Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department~ City Manager:~ \L , <:s-glfYHt SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION, L.L.C. Agenda Item 15 April 11, 2007 Public Hearing Staff Planner: Carolyn A. K. Smith REQUEST: Chanqe of Zoninq District Classification of 23.1 acres from R-5D Residential District to Conditional A-36 Apartment District, 26.3 acres of R-5D Residential District to Conditional B-4 Mixed Use District and 84.4 acres of R-5D Residential District to Conditional A-12 Apartment District with a PD-H2 Overlay. ADDRESS I DESCRIPTION: Property located on the southeast and southwest corners of South Independence Boulevard and Princess Anne Road and 1632 Salem Road. COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT: SITE SIZE: GPINS: 1485050352 1485251012 1475856017 1 - CENTERVILLE and 7 - PRINCESS ANNE 133.8 acres SUMMARY OF REQUEST At the request of the Planning Commission, the applicant has reconsidered several points of the project related to traffic and school issues. The proposed changes include: a reduction in the number of apartments from 500 to 400 units; a set aside of 100 units, within the single family and townhouses, as age restricted defined as at least one (1) occupant being 55 years old or older; a reduction of workforce housing units from 81 to 62 units; a modification of ingress/egress of the commercial site from a right in/right out to a right in only; and, an elimination of an ingress/egress for the apartment site directly onto Princess Anne Road. These changes result in a (5) percent decrease in new traffic by reduction of 859 vehicles per day. The applicant proposes to rezone 110.7 acres of R-5D Residential District on the west side of South Independence Boulevard to 26.3 acres of Conditional B-4 Mixed Use District for retail, hotel and office use and 84.4 acres to Conditional A-12 Apartment District with a PD-H2 Overlay for the development of 103 single-family dwellings, 347 town homes and 230 twin townhomes. The applicant has proffered that 62 of the townhomes (or roughly 9.1 percent of the dwellings on the west side of South Independence Boulevard) will be set aside for 'workforce housing' at prices ranging from approximately $170,000 to SOUTH INDEPENDENCEi~\CQUISrrION Ag(3nda It~~i 15 ~Cl.gE31 $190,000 (originally, the applicant proffered 81 units as workforce housing). The remainder of the homes will sell from approximately $200,000 to more than $300,000. The applicant has also proffered that 100 of the units will be age restricted, requiring that at least one (1) of the occupants be 55 years or older. This is also a modification to the original request reviewed by Planning Commission in March. On the east side of South Independence Boulevard, the applicant proposes to rezone 23.1 acres of R-5D Residential District to Conditional A-36 Apartment District for 400 units of apartments and congregate care (senior housing). This is a reduction of 100 apartment units from the original proposal. A Conditional Use Permit will be required for a senior housing complex on this site. This can be pursued at a later date. The conceptual development plan depicts a mixture of dwelling types throughout the 84.8 acres of residential units on the west side of Independence Boulevard, as described above, not to exceed 680 units. The site is laid out in a neo-traditional arrangement of streets and alleys focusing on the proposed lake and the proposed commercial center. Access for the units on this side of South Independence Boulevard is proposed at single points on Salem Road, Lynnhaven Parkway, and South Independence Boulevard. The development will be served by a network of private streets and alleys. The detached single-family and the town homes will be accessed via alleyways while the twin townhomes will be served with surface parking, as depicted on the plan. A community center with a clubhouse, an exercise facility, and a swimming pool is proposed to serve the residents of the community. Open space is planned throughout the development totaling 12.7 acres, the minimum acreage required for PD-H2 communities (15 percent of the total 84.4 acres of proposed PD-H2). A lakeside park with a trail is proposed around a lake that will serve as an aesthetic amenity as well as a stormwater management facility. A children's play area is also proposed within the community. At least two (2) on-site parking spaces per unit are proposed with additional on-street parking on all streets, other than alleys. The detached single-family dwelling elevations depict cottage-style homes and traditional two (2)-story homes with influences of the Craftsman and Neo-Classical styles. Examples of architectural elements include porches, dormer windows, brick skirting, and brick front facades. Proffered exterior materials for all residential dwellings in this community include brick, premium vinyl, composite siding, natural stone, cultured stone, and stucco. The homes will range in size from approximately 1,600 square feet to 2,400 square feet. The townhouse (labeled as attached single-family homes in the Design Criteria manual) do not depict a singular style. The units are a mix of Federal and Rural Vernacular influence. The all-vinyl elevation of the twin townhomes (a "block" of connected townhomes) is attractively designed with shutters, arbors and entry details. The interior area of both townhouse styles is proposed as approximately 1,600 to 1,900 square feet. Access for the proposed 26.3 acres of commercial is depicted on South Independence Boulevard as well as a right in along Princess Anne Road. The plan exhibited to the Planning Commission in March depicted a right in/right out along Princess Anne Road. The commercial property is proposed with a mix of office and retail space utilizing a "main street" streetscape. Total interior area of both retail and office space is proposed as 157,500 and 42,700 square feet, respectively. Along with the office and retail space, a six (6)-floor hotel is proposed with a maximum of 150 rooms. Elevations of the proposed hotel were not proffered; however, the proffer agreement states that not only the hotel but all of the commercial buildings will be constructed using building designs and architectural materials reflective of the photographs presented at the end of this report, which are a component of the proffered Design Guidelines manual. The photographs depict an attractive, pedestrian-oriented design utilizing brick, exterior finishing insulation system (EIFS), and awnings, similar to the higher-quality commercial centers located in the city. The layout is urban, with the buildings set close to the street with wide sidewalks to enhance the experience of pedestrians. The overall design allows use of the commercial center for SOUTH INDEPENDENCEACQUISITION ~genda Iterfj 15 8€i9Et2 vehicles from outside the development and for residents of the community who can walk to and from the center. Access for the proposed 23.1 acres of Conditional A-36 Apartment District is depicted on South Independence Boulevard, opposite the commercial site's entrance on the west side of the street. The proposed apartments are situated at the southeast corner of the intersection of Princess Anne Road and South Independence Boulevard. The apartment buildings will be up to four (4) stories in height and will consist of a total of 400 units. The building elevations depict a mix of vinyl siding and brick on the exterior with porches, brick arch accents, and staggered building heights for the units adjacent to existing residentially zoned properties. LAND USE AND ZONING INFORMATION EXISTING LAND USE: Undeveloped site that has been used for crop production in the past. SURROUNDING LAND North: . USE AND ZONING: . South: . East: . . . West: . . . Princess Anne Road Retail and residential / PD-H1 Planned Unit District Duplex and single-family dwellings / R-5D Residential Duplex District Duplex and single-family dwellings / R-5D Residential Duplex South Independence Boulevard Retail / B-2 Community Business District Mixed retail and restaurant / Conditional B-2 Community Business District Lynnhaven Parkway and Salem Road Multifamily dwellings / R-5D with a PD-H2 overlay The majority of the site is currently a vacant, undeveloped field that has been used for crop production in the recent past. There is a home on the site adjacent to Salem Road with several substantial trees surrounding it. There is also a stand of mature trees along the southern property line on the west side of South Independence Boulevard. The applicant does propose development and clearing within this wooded area but has expressed a desire to maintain as much of the woods as possible, 5.8 acres, upon completion of the construction. NATURAL RESOURCE AND CULTURAL FEATURES: AICUZ: The site is in an AICUZ of Less than 65 dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. IMPACT ON CITY SERVICES MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN (MTP) I CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP): Princess Anne Road is currently an eight (B)-lane divided major urban arterial roadway. This roadway is classified as a Controlled Access Principal Arterial roadway in the Master Transportation Plan. This section of Princess Anne Road in the vicinity of the proposed development is completely built out and there are no plans SOUTH INDEPENDENCE,t\CQUISI~!PN ,t\genda It~~.t5 R~g~3 for any improvements to this section of the roadway. Lynnhaven Parkway is currently a four (4)-lane divided major urban arterial roadway. No roadway improvement projects are proposed for this section of Lynnhaven Parkway. South Independence Boulevard is a four (4)-lane divided major suburban arterial roadway. No roadway improvement projects are proposed for this section of South Independence Boulevard. Salem Road is a four (4)-lane divided minor suburban arterial roadway. No roadway improvement projects are proposed for this section of Salem Road. The City, however, is in the design stages of a "congestion relief intersection project" at the Salem Road intersection with Princess Anne Road to the north of this site. This project is scheduled to be completed in 2009, and is intended to add capacity to the Salem Road and Windsor Oaks Boulevard legs of the intersection. TRAFFIC: Street Name Present Present Capacity Generated Traffic Volume Princess Anne 51,000 ADT 1 54,300 ADT (Level of Total Development Road Service "C") - 65,800 ADT Existing Land Use 2 - 7,656 1 (Level of Service "D") ADT Proposed Land Use 3 - 21,212 ADT Lynnhaven 24,500 ADT 12,400 ADT 1 (Level of Parkway Service "C") - 28,900 ADT Total Proposed 1 (Level of Service "D") Residential (6,817 ADT) 24,500 ADT 1 (Level of 2,688 ADT / 400 apartments South 20,600 ADT 2,795 ADT / 477 townhomes Independence Service "C") - 30,600 ADT 986 ADT / 103 single family Boulevard 1 (Level of Service "D") 348 ADT / 1 00 senior 24,500 ADT 1 (Level of housing Salem Road 14,900 ADT Service "C") - 30,600 ADT Total Proposed 1 (Level of Service "D") CommerciaVOffice (13,521 ADT) 8,254 ADT / 135,000 square feet of shopping center 2,225 ADT / 17,500 square feet of restaurant 1,234 ADT / 5,000 square feet of bank 470 ADT / 42,700 square feet of general office 1 ,338 ADT / 150 room hotel , Average Dally Tnps 2 as defined by 800 dwellings 3 as defined by all uses within proposed development WATER: This site must connect to City water. There is an existing 12-inch City water main in Lynnhaven Parkway, a 16-inch City water main on Salem Road, a 24-inch City water main on Princess Anne Road, a 16- inch City water main on South Independence, and a 6 inch City water main on Solar Lane. SOUTH INDEPENDENCEACQUISmlON Agenda Iterl'1>15 I?(;lg~ if SEWER: The sanitary sewer along Salem Road and Solar Lane does not appear to have adequate depth to serve the properties. Pump Station #567 and #558 do not have the capacity to support the proposed development. A new pump station will be required for this project. There is an existing 16-inch sanitary sewer force main and a 10-inch City gravity sanitary sewer main on Salem Road, and an 8-inch City gravity sanitary sewer main on Solar Lane. SCHOOLS: School** Current Capacity Generation 1 Change 2 Enrollment Salem Elementary 468 497 164 -20 Landstown Elementary 783 876 164 -20 Landstown Middle 1,587 1,596 103 -6 Landstown HiQh 2,270 2,181 120 -20 " " generation represents the number of students that the development Will add to the school 2 "change" represents the difference between generated students under the existing zoning and under the proposed zoning. The number can be positive (additional students) or negative (fewer students). ..The school division is analyzing if this property (all or part) should be redistricted to adjacent schools to balance the anticipated student generation with existing capacity and future membership projections. School Board staff note that during the 7 to 10 year build-out that the applicant has indicated necessary to complete this development, the number of middle school and high school students in this area will continue to decline. Thus, any 'overcrowding' shown on the chart above should resolve itself through these anticipated declines in school-age population. In addition, the membership numbers will be continually monitored, as they always are, and adjustments to the school districts assigned to this property are likely to occur. It should be noted that the School Board will not take any redistricting action until more information is obtained through final site plan approval, etc. The revised plan will generate 46 less students than if the property is developed under the current zoning. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of this request with the submitted proffers. The proffers are provided below. EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan Map and land use policies place this site within the Primary Residential Area, which indicates the importance of neighborhood character and its relationship to compatible land use and traffic management. The land use planning policies and principles for the Primary Residential Area focus strongly on preserving and protecting the overall character, economic value and aesthetic quality of the stable neighborhoods located in this area. Planning guidance for this site is found on page 113 of the Plan's Policy Document (Plan), where the site is referred to as "Site 7.1 - the Spence Farm property." The Plan recommends a high quality, attractive, mixed-use development that advances the economic vitality objectives of the City. The Plan's Housing and Neighborhood section encourages mixed-income residential within mixed-use developments. Page 246 of the Plan provides a housing affordability goal as follows: "Provide an SOUTH INDEPENDENCE.ACQUISI]ION Agendaltern.t5 , 8~g~t5 adequate supply of safe, decent, attractive and diverse housing, with a range of values including owner- occupied and rental units, to accommodate the present and future needs of all Virginia Beach residents." This reinforces the City's goal of providing diverse, high-quality and affordable housing in desirable neighborhoods. Based on the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan the proposed development should devote a large percentage of the site to high quality non-residential uses to advance the economic vitality objectives stated in the Plan (pages 9 and 114). In addition, the Plan states that "a traffic impact analysis should be conducted, including transportation improvement measures that will ensure efficient traffic movement on-site and in the vicinity of the development. It is recommended that no additional access be allowed onto Princess Anne Road. Access to Independence Boulevard and Salem Road should be kept to a minimum." Evaluation: When evaluating projects of this magnitude, Staff considers many factors prior to making a recommendation of approval or disapproval. Those factors include, but are not necessarily limited to: school impacts, public utility availability, road capacities, benefits to citizens, the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, details of the proffer agreement, and overall quality of the proposal. None of these issues can be viewed in isolation, but the project must be viewed as a whole. At the request of the Planning Commission, the applicant has revised the application related to several of these issues. The revised plan reflects the following changes: a reduction in the number of apartments from 500 to 400 units; a set aside of 100 units, within the single family and townhouses, as age restricted defined as at least one (1) occupant being 55 years old or older; a reduction of workforce housing units from 81 to 62 units; a modification of ingress/egress of the commercial site from a right in/right out to a right in only; and, an elimination of an ingress/egress for the apartment site directly onto Princess Anne Road. In terms of traffic generation, the decrease in units and the modification of unit types result in a (5) percent decrease in traffic generated. The revised plan represents a reduction of 874 vehicles per day. It is estimated that the entire project at build out will generate 20,338 trips per day rather than 21,212 trips as originally proposed (6,817 residential trips and 13,521 commercial/office/hotel trips. While Staff is satisfied that the improvements proffered will ensure that the level of traffic will remain at the "by right" and "no build" scenarios, there will certainly be impacts to the system. These impacts are described in great detail below. The proposed reduction in trips will not significantly affect the results of the Traffic Impact Study (TIS) generally accepted by Public WorksfTraffic Engineering. As an example, the result of the proposed decrease in housing units reduced the delay at the Lynnhaven Road/Independence Boulevard intersection by only one (1) second per vehicle in the P.M. peak hour. Therefore, Traffic Engineering's comments, that are included below, on the TIS are still valid. It should also be noted that the original plan submitted by the applicant represented an increase of 25 school age children beyond the "by right" development, while the revised plan, with modified housing types and less dwelling units, is estimated to generate 46 fewer students than if the property were developed by right under the current zoning. The Comprehensive Plan: As noted above, the Comprehensive Plan has many goals related to housing and neighborhoods that are designed to advance the guiding principles that provide the foundation to implement the Plan. While the Plan discusses the need to provide a broad range of housing types, the first guiding principle is "Quality." Page 245 of the Plan states "...that quality and construction of housing and neighborhoods, at all price ranges, will be the most cost effective approach to achieving our goals over the long term." The key is to insist that all types of housing, no matter the price range, be of high quality in terms of building materials, architectural design and site layout. In an effort to meet the goals for housing and neighborhoods SOUTH INDEPENDENCEACQUISITfON Agenda Ue~,15 8~gf?6 addressed in the Plan and in light of recent discussions concerning the importance of workforce housing, the applicant has voluntarily proffered (Proffer # 18) to offer 62 dwelling units to future homeowners who qualify, as described below. The original submission proffered 81 units of workforce housing. The current plan proffers 62 units or approximately nine (9) percent of the 680 units on the west side of South Independence Boulevard as workforce housing. Understandably, there is concern as to what "workforce" housing means. It must, therefore, be emphasized that workforce housing does not mean subsidized, low income, targeted housing but rather housing units available only to those who qualify with a yearly family income roughly between $48,000 to $70,000 per year. The intention is to provide owner-occupied housing for those in the workforce who traditionally, due to income, may not be able to afford to own a quality home. Public safety employees, nurses and other medical professionals, and retail sales employees fall within this category. The applicant has indicated that the workforce housing dwellings will sell at approximately $170,000 to $190,000, while the remainder of the dwellings will be priced at market value from $200,000 to $300,000 or more. The workforce housing units will be physically indistinguishable from the market rate dwellings, and will be interspersed throughout the townhomes. In an effort to determine the degree to which these values compare to the values of homes in the surrounding area, the Department of Housing and Neighborhood Preservation researched the assessments of properties in the vicinity. The research revealed that the average assessed value of dwellings within 1.3 miles of the center of the proposed development is approximately $171,000, which corresponds to approximately $197,000 in market value. It should be noted that these numbers, generated in February 2007, are based on 2006 assessment data from the City Assessor. The Comprehensive Plan also notes that, when developed, this site should "allow a well-planned and complementary mix of residential, employment and other related, non-retail uses consistent with the overall land use and economic growth objectives of the Princess Anne Corridor Plan." Five (5) specific development criteria are recommended for this site as well. Staff concludes that this application has addressed many of these criteria, with the principal exception being the amount of retail proposed for this site. While the Plan does discourage additional retail in the vicinity, Staff's position is that the proffered development plan meets the intent of the majority of the Comprehensive Plan's goals, and when reviewed holistically, the proposed retail acts as a unifying element of the community, serving the future residents as well as those in adjacent neighborhoods and the nearby educational center and businesses, and providing the potential for reduced vehicle trips through the integration of the retail with the residential. Traffic Related Issues: Traffic Engineering substantially agrees with the conclusions of the Traffic Impact Study (TIS) for Renaissance Park, dated February 12,2007, and is approving the recommendations and conclusions of the TIS except as noted in the comments to follow. Traffic Engineering's approval of the TIS means that the applicant has satisfied the requirements of the City of Virginia Beach Traffic Impact Study guidelines and technical requirements. The TIS indicates that with the proposed infrastructure improvements to be proffered with this rezoning application, the roadway network in the study area will operate at the same Level of Service with the traffic generated by the proposed development as it would with the by right development traffic without the proffered improvements. It is important to remember that the site is currently zoned R-5D Residential Duplex, and by right (with no City Council review), the applicant could develop the site for somewhere between 800 and 850 dwelling units. Thus, the by-right development potential has an 'invisible' impact on the roadway system in that what is now an agricultural field has the potential to significantly impact the roadway network, and do so without any improvements to that system being required. SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION Agenda Item 15 Page 7 This is not, however, to infer that there will be no traffic impacts with the proposed development on the adjacent roadway network. Traffic Engineering is noting two (2) specific intersections within the study area that the TIS shows will be significantly impacted by traffic associated with proposed Renaissance Park development. The first of these is the Princess Anne Road and Lynnhaven Parkway intersection. The TIS shows that in the 2012 buildout year, that intersection would operate at a Level of Service "0" in the afternoon peak hour, which is acceptable. With the proposed development traffic added to the 2012 background traffic, the intersection would operate at a Level of Service "0" in the afternoon peak hour, and thus the City's requirement of no decrease in the Level of Service is technically satisfied. What is noted, however, is that the delay per vehicle at this signalized intersection increases from 40.3 seconds in the 'no-build' (by-right) scenario to 54.8 seconds in the build condition, which is on the borderline of Level of Service "D"f'E". The cutoff between Level of Service "C"f'D" is 40.0 seconds and the cutoff between Level of Service "D"f'E" is 55.0 seconds. The specific impact to each of the 7,099 vehicles passing thru this intersection in the afternoon peak hour is an increased delay of 14.3 seconds per vehicle and a total increase in delay of 28.2 hours each day in the afternoon peak hour at this intersection. The second intersection of note is the Lynnhaven Parkway and South Independence Boulevard signalized intersection, which is not located immediately near the site, but is instead northeast of the site where two roads serving the development intersect. The TIS shows that the proposed development would cause a decreased Level of Service at this intersection in the afternoon peak hour due to the effects of the added traffic that would travel through this intersection, whish is already over-capacity. According to the City's TIS guidelines, the applicant is required to proffer roadway improvements that would bring the Level of Service back to no-build or by-right development conditions. The applicant, therefore, has proffered turn lane improvements at this intersection that would be built as part of the development project. The improvements proffered by the applicant will not bring this intersection to what is considered an acceptable Level of Service in the afternoon peak hour, but they will bring the Level of Service to its current no-build and by-right conditions. The delay per vehicle for the 2012 'build' condition with the proposed improvements would be 69.1 seconds, which would be between the 'no-build' condition delay per vehicle of 64.1 seconds per vehicle and the 'build' by-right condition delay per vehicle of 79.6 seconds. All three of these conditions result in a Level of Service "E". The Department of Public Works has identified funding for turn lane improvements for this intersection that, when combined with the improvements to be proffered by the applicant, would result in acceptable Level of Service "0" in the no- build, build by-right and build conditions. If the Renaissance Park rezoning is approved as proffered, the publicly funded improvements for this intersection could be constructed with the developer funded improvements, with completion possible prior to the projected buildout of the Renaissance Park development in 2012. The major recommendations presented in the TIS for Renaissance Park, which includes the proffered roadway network improvements that would be built by the applicant if the rezoning is approved, are summarized below and noted as being either acceptable or not acceptable to Public Works Engineering. Public Works Engineering supports and accepts the following recommendations included in the Renaissance Park TIS: . At the proposed main development entrance on South Independence Boulevard, a traffic signal will be installed at the existing median opening and left and right turn lanes on South Independence Boulevard will be added. Appropriate turn lanes will be built on the development approaches to the signalized intersection. This location is the only new traffic signal that would be installed with this development. SOUTH INDEPENDENCEACQUISIfION Agenda Iterm15 e~g~8 . Turn lanes on Salem Road would be added at the existing median opening, which will become an intersection with the proposed western access point for the development. A traffic signal at this intersection would not be warranted. . At the existing three (3)-legged intersection of Lynnhaven Parkway and the southern Salem Crossing (Wal-Mart) shopping center entrance, an entrance/exit for the development would be added to form the fourth leg of the intersection. The existing westbound Lynnhaven Parkway left turn lane would be lengthened to meet the City's left turn lane requirements. This intersection will not be signalized. . At the off-site Lynnhaven Parkway and South Independence Boulevard intersection, located north of the development site, the existing westbound Lynnhaven Parkway single left turn lane will be made a dual left turn lane with added storage length on both lanes. In addition, the existing southbound Independence Boulevard left turn lane will be lengthened for added storage. Public Works Engineering Staff does not support or accept the following recommendations included in the Renaissance Park TIS: . Recommendations # 8 and # 9 related to the proposed right-in only entrance on Princess Anne Road that the applicant has proposed on the Conceptual Development Plan included in the TIS. The Department of Public Works will not support any access points for the development onto Princess Anne Road. Princess Anne Road is listed on the City's Master Transportation Plan as a "Controlled Access" roadway, meaning that direct driveway access will not be allowed from Princess Anne Road. In addition, the City's Comprehensive Plan recommends in the Plan's development criteria for this property no additional access will be allowed to Princess Anne Road. Finally, Traffic Engineering does not agree with the statement in Recommendations # 8 and # 9 that the entrances will remove some traffic from the Princess Anne Road intersection. The proposed right-in would only modify how vehicles traveled through the intersection. Further, if the access removed from the plan, there will be no change in the Level of Service noted in the report since, as a worst case scenario, no traffic was assigned to the access point in the TIS. Also of importance is that the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) designates this portion of Princess Anne Road as a Limited Access Highway. To secure that designation, when this portion of Princess Anne Road was expanded to its current configuration, VDOT purchased from the owners of the subject property all rights of access to the new highway. . Traffic Engineering cannot support Recommendation # 5(f) that concludes a traffic signal is currently warranted at the Lynnhaven Parkway and southern Salem Crossing shopping center intersection based upon the existing traffic at the intersection. The analysis assumption used to determine that a traffic signal is warranted is not accepted by the Traffic Engineering Division. Using Traffic Engineering's accepted analysis methods, a traffic signal is not warranted with existing or projected future traffic conditions at this intersection. A Traffic Signal Bond, however, will be required at the construction plan approval stage to cover the development's portion of the cost for a traffic signal to serve this intersection if the signal becomes warranted and approved by the City .n the future. The bond amounts will be determined at a later date and will be based upon the data presented in the TIS. In sum, through implementation of the recommendations of the TIS that the City's Traffic Engineers find acceptable, the impact of the traffic generated by the proposed development will essentially be equivalent to the impact of the no-build or by-right development allowable under the existing zoning. As such, Staff is '." SOUTH INDEPENDENCEACQUISITION A~emda Item. 15 8~g~9 satisfied that the project, while generating traffic, will not exacerbate traffic issues in the area beyond what would occur with the existing zoning. Moreover, through the proffers submitted by the applicant with the Conditional Zoning, physical improvements to the transportation system necessary as a result of traffic generated by the development will be addressed by the applicant rather than the City. Overall oroiect auality: The conceptual development plan depicts a mixture of dwelling types throughout the 84.8 acres of residential units on the west side of South Independence Boulevard, not to exceed 680 units. A total of 103 single-family dwellings, 347 townhomes, and 230 twin town homes are proposed on the 84.8 acres. One hundred of these units will be limited to households with at least one (1) occupant 55 years old or older. Under the existing R-5D Residential Duplex zoning, this site could be homogeneously developed with 800 to 850 duplex units. It is likely that this type of by-right large-scale development would provide lower-quality building materials, site layout, and open space design, as well as substantially less of a housing mix than what any proffered plan would provide. The advantage of a proffered, Conditional Zoning is that it provides a high level of predictability to surrounding residents, other property owners, staff, and City Council regarding what the final product and resultant community will be. The 32 proffers listed below are very detailed in terms of addressing site layout, locations of uses, exterior building materials, site amenities, landscape materials, recreational amenities, infrastructure improvements, and similar items. Staff is satisfied that the details described in this report and as proffered below will ensure a safe, vibrant, aesthetically pleasing community, with minimal impact on City services and the transportation system beyond what could be built by right. Staff does. however. have concern with the unresolved issue pertainina to the one (1) proposed riaht-in access point on Princess Anne Road. It is recommended that this access point be denied. and the concept plan referenced in Proffer # 1 be revised to eliminate such access. To reinforce the Master Transportation Plan's recommendation that no access be allowed onto Princess Anne Road, past development projects have been consistently discouraged by staff from such requests, and the City Council has consistently supported the Plan. In support of this, a brief summary pertaining to requests for access along Princess Anne Road follows: . In conjunction with a Conditional Change of Zoning request, the Salem Crossing Shopping Center (Wal-Mart) at Lynnhaven Parkway and Princess Anne road was permitted a right-in only, replacing an existing full entrance at the exact location. . When the Green Run Land Use Plan was modified to allow the construction of the Target at South Independence Boulevard and Princes Anne Road, Target requested an access on Princess Anne Road; however, the request was denied by City Council. . During the Conditional Change of Zoning for the site of the existing Home Depot at Lynnhaven Parkway and Princess Anne Road, an access on Princess Anne Road was requested; however, it too was denied by City Council. . During the Conditional Change of Zoning for the new Sentara at Princess Anne campus, access to Princess Anne Road was limited to a gated access on Princess Anne Road accessible only by emergency vehicles. . Courthouse Marketplace shopping center at Princess Anne Road and Nimmo Parkway was only permitted a right-in access from Princess Anne Road, in conjunction with a Conditional Change of Zoning request. This access was granted since the project eliminated three (3) existing single- SOUTH INDEPENDENCE.ACQUISITION Agenda lteJn15 Pg9~10 family residential curb cuts along Princess Anne Road. · The Landstown Commons shopping center at Princess Anne Road and Dam Neck Road was permitted a full entrance on Princess Anne Road in conjunction with a Conditional Change of Zoning request. This project, however, consisted in the consolidation of six (6) parcels and portions of two (2) others, with each parcel having existing by-right access on Princess Anne Road. The development proposal met two (2) critical elements of the Comprehensive Plan's Princess Anne Corridor Study: consolidation of parcels and limitation of access. Since the development project, in effect, eliminated six (6) access points, one (1) full signalized access point was allowed with the Conditional Change of Zoning. In sum, Staff recommends approval of this Conditional Change of Zoning. The applicant has proffered a development plan that provides a variety of housing types, a street and open space layout that encourages pedestrian movement and interaction, and offers economic development opportunities by providing a commercial hub of potential retail and office uses. Impact on public services is shown to be similar to the impact that would occur if this site were developed with the existing zoning. Unlike the by- right development, however, this proposal proffers to address the most significant impact, transportation, through various physical improvements. Staff reiterates, however, that the request for the right in only ingress cannot be supported; such access is contrary to the designation by the Master Transportation Plan of Princess Anne Road as a Controlled Access roadway. PROFFERS The following are proffers submitted by the applicant as part of a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA). The applicant, consistent with Section 1 07(h) of the City Zoning Ordinance, has voluntarily submitted these proffers in an attempt to "offset identified problems to the extent that the proposed rezoning is acceptable," (~1 07(h)(1)). Should this application be approved, the proffers will be recorded at the Circuit Court and serve as conditions restricting the use of the property as proposed with this change of zoning. PROFFER 1: In order to create a sense of place featuring stormwater retention ponds as aesthetic amenities, community centers, multiple residential products along with commercial development, including a hotel, the Grantor agrees to develop the Property with the elements and character set forth on the Land Use Plan entitled, "CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN" (the "Plan"), prepared by LRK as depicted in the Renaissance Park Design Guidelines book (the "Design Guidelines"), dated November 28, 2006, last revised March 23, 2007, a copy of which is on file with the Department of Planning and has been exhibited to the City Council. PROFFER 2: It is recognized that the detailed building plans, as well as the site plans for the various elements within a Village, may change as the planning stage progresses. The intent of the elevations referred to throughout this Agreement is to demonstrate the architectural style and quality of the buildings represented. The intent of the site plans referred to throughout this Agreement is to identify the elements that will be developed within each Village, though the actual siting, dimensions and orientation of those elements within a Village may change as final design dictates. Final elevations and locations for all of the structures shall be submitted to the Planning Director for review and approval prior to site plan approval. SOUTH INDEPENDENCEACQUISITION Agendaltern15 P~g~J1 MULTI-FAMILY APARTMENT VILLAGE (CONDITIONAL A-36 ZONING DISTRICT) PROFFER 3: The village depicted on the Plan as "Multi-Family Apartment Village" shall be developed as a multiple family residential apartment community. The residential dwellings facing Princess Anne Road and South Independence Boulevard shall be developed with architectural features that are similar to those depicted on the architectural elevation entitled "MULTI-FAMILY APARTMENTS STREET FRONTAGE ELEVATION", as shown in the Design Guidelines. The architectural features are to include brick veneer on the low level, picket railings on the balconies, horizontal lapped siding, and roofs with a 5 in 12 minimum slope. Any four- story portions of the buildings are to be at least 100' from the adjoining residential property. The interior residential dwellings shall be developed with architectural features that are similar to those depicted on the architectural elevation entitled "MULTI-FAMILY APARTMENTS FRONT ELEVATION - INTERIOR BUILDING", as shown in the Design Guidelines. Parking for the residential apartment community may include detached and/or attached garages, in addition to surface parking. PROFFER 4: The Multi-Family Apartment Village shall include a community center with an exercise facility, a pool, a business office and surrounding open space. The community center building shall be developed with architectural features that are similar to those depicted on the architectural elevation entitled "MUL TI- FAMILY APARTMENTS CLUBHOUSE ELEVATION", as shown in the Design Guidelines. PROFFER 5: The total number of multi-family apartments to be developed on the Property zoned Conditional A-36 shall not exceed 400 units. PROFFER 6: At the time each section or phase of the Multi-Family Apartment Village is developed, Grantor shall install a combination of landscaping and berming along Princess Anne Road and South Independence Boulevard. RESIDENTIAL VILLAGE (CONDITIONAL A-12 WITH A PD-H2 OVERLAY) PROFFER 7: The village depicted on the Plan as "Residential Village" shall be developed with a mix of residential products in a condominium regime with architectural features that are similar to those depicted on the architectural elevations entitled as "TWIN TOWNHOMES FRONT ELEVATION", "TWIN TOWNHOMES SIDE ELEVATIONS", "SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED ELEVATION", and "SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOME ELEVATIONS", as shown in the Design Guidelines. PROFFER 8: The Residential Village shall include a community center with an exercise facility, a pool and surrounding open space. The community center building shall be developed with architectural features that are similar to those depicted on the architectural elevation entitled "RESIDENTIAL CLUBHOUSE ELEVATION", as shown in the Design Guidelines. PROFFER 9: The total combination of single-family detached, single-family attached and twin townhouses to be developed on the Property zoned Conditional A-12 with a PD-H2 overlay shall not exceed 680 units. PROFFER 10: SOUTH INDEPENDENCEACQUISITION A@enda ItefJ'i15 PClg~..J 2 Grantor shall record a declaration of protective covenants, conditions and restrictions (the "Restrictions") governing all of the Property zoned Conditional A-12 with a PD-H2 overlay, which shall be administered and enforced by a mandatory homeowners association which will be responsible for maintaining all common areas including, but not limited to, the clubhouse, pool, open space areas, landscape buffers and stormwater retention ponds located within the Residential Village. PROFFER 11: Grantor shall restrict at least one hundred (100) dwelling units within the Property for occupation, on a full time basis, by at least one adult resident of fifty-five (55) years of age or older. Such restriction shall also prohibit persons under twenty (20) years of age from residing in such units for more than one hundred and twenty (120) days in any calendar year. The age restrictions shall be contained in a Declaration of Restrictions recorded against the restricted units and shall be administered and enforced by the homeowners association. In the event the approved site plan(s) for the Property provide for less than 1080 dwelling units, Grantor shall be entitled to reduce the number of age-restricted units it reserves by a number equal to the difference between 1080 units and the number of dwelling units permitted to be constructed in accordance with the approved site plan(s). PROFFER 12: With respect to the areas shown on the Plan within the Residential Village as "Open Space" (the "Open Space Area"), Grantor shall file and obtain approval of a rezoning petition to rezone the Open Space Area to P-1 (Preservation District), as defined in the CZO, prior to the date the first building permit in the Residential Village is issued. Such Open Space Area shall be subject to recorded restrictive covenants which prohibit the use of such areas for any purpose other than recreation and open space use. PROFFER 13: Grantor shall provide for maintenance of the Open Space Area by the homeowners association, in which case all property owners within the Residential Village shall be responsible for the costs and expenses of such maintenance. PROFFER 14: When developed, all single-family detached, single-family attached and twin townhouses within the Residential Village shall meet or exceed the setbacks and lot dimensions set forth on the page entitled "Design Criteria" in the Design Guidelines. PROFFER 15: Grantor shall ensure that the addresses for units within the Residential Village that are located on alleys will have addresses located on the rear of the structure. PROFFER 16: Grantor shall provide street trees along the streets within the Residential Village. In addition, Grantor shall provide ornamental trees throughout the Residential Village in those areas where space and conditions permit. The street trees will be selected from the City's list of recommended street trees and spaced accordingly. PROFFER 17: At the time each section or phase of the Residential Village is developed, Grantor shall install a combination of landscaping and berming along South Independence Boulevard, Salem Road and Lynnhaven Parkway. PROFFER 18: SOUTH INDEPENDENC~~CQUISlti!ON Agenda Iterl'il.15 Pa.g$J3 Grantor shall reserve sixty-two (62) dwelling units for work force housing (as set forth below). Grantor shall work with the Directors of Planning and Housing and Neighborhood Preservation to ensure the implementation of a program that reserves such homes for sale to credit-worthy buyers having incomes between 80% and 120% of area median household income, determined using HUD-published figures as adjusted for family size, for the year in which the home buyer is qualified to purchase. Such program shall provide: (a) that the Grantor shall distribute reserved dwelling units among credit-worthy buyers at all spectrums of the median household income range set forth above; (b) that sale of the reserved units shall result in a housing cost ratio for the qualified buyer that is acceptable to the Director of Housing; (c) for integration of those dwelling units reserved for qualified buyers throughout the townhouse and twin townhouse portions of the Residential Village (both in terms of location and in terms of time of sale); and (d) for reserved dwelling units that are physically indistinguishable on the exterior from other dwelling units of the same type and size. COMMERCIAL VILLAGE (CONDITIONAL 8-4) PROFFER 19: The Commercial Village depicted on the Plan shall be developed as a pedestrian friendly commercial center having retail space, office space, anchor tenants and a hotel. The Commercial Village shall be developed in the character of a "main street" retail and commercial concept, though the final siting, dimensions and orientation of the buildings, drive aisles and parking areas may differ from that reflected in the Plan depicted in the Design Guidelines PROFFER 20: The buildings within the Commercial Village on the Plan shall use multiple building articulations, and a variety of building materials, finishes and colors. The buildings shall be of a quality and of a similar architectural character as those reflected in the photographs entitled "SHOPS AND OFFICE ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER" as shown in the Design Guidelines. PROFFER 21 : Outparcel buildings, as well as the hotel, shall be developed using building designs and architectural materials substantially similar to and compatible with the designs and materials stated in proffer 20 above. PROFFER 22: The Commercial Village shall voluntarily comply with the following sections of the CZO pertaining to design standards for retail establishments and shopping centers: Sections 245(a)(2), 245(a)(3), 245(a)(4), 245(b)(1), 245(c)(1), 245(c)(2), 245(c)(3), 246(d)(5), 247(c), 247(d), 247(e) and 248(a). PROFFER 23: Monument signs identifying the Commercial Village shall be located along Princess Anne Road and South Independence Boulevard in the locations shown on the Plan in the Design Guidelines. PROFFER 24: Signs containing moving or scrolling text shall be prohibited within the Commercial Village. PROFFER 25: The service and/or loading areas of the shops, offices and anchor buildings shown on the Plan shall be painted neutral, earth tone colors and shall be screened from the view from public rights-of-way and/or residentially zoned property as depicted on the drawings entitled "SERVICE AREA SCREENING" as shown in the Design Guidelines. SOUTH INDEPENDENCE~CQUISlr'tPN Agenda Ite~i15 , ~gs:J~'J~ PROFFER 26: All dumpsters shall be enclosed on at least three sides and screened as required by the City Zoning Ordinance. Dumpster locations shall be depicted on the final site plan. PROFFER 27: All site lighting installed along any portion of a building in the Commercial Village facing an adjoining residential use and all site lighting installed in a parking area adjoining a residential use shall be directed away from the adjoining residential neighborhood and shall be downward directed and shielded to minimize light seepage into the adjoining residential neighborhood. PROFFER 28: At the time each section or phase of the Commercial Village is developed, Grantor shall install a combination of landscaping and berming of at least 30' in width along Princess Anne Road and at least 15' in width along South Independence Boulevard. PROFFER 29: The Grantor shall construct a pedestrian connection to provide pedestrian access between the hotel and the "main street" feature of the Commercial Village. PROFFER 30: One right in only turn lane from Princess Anne Road into the Commercial Village shall be permitted. Such turn lane shall be constructed in accordance with City standards. PROFFER 31: Grantor shall comply with the recommendations for roadway improvements listed as Recommendations 1 through 7 in Chapter 7 of the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by Bryant B. Goodloe, P.C., last revised February 26,2007, a copy of which is on file with the Department of Public Works, Traffic Engineering Division. PROFFER 32: Further conditions may be required by the Grantee during detailed Site Plan review and administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City Agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements. STAFF COMMENTS: Other than the proposed one (1) right-in only on Princess Anne Road, the proffers listed above are acceptable as they dictate the level of quality of the project. The City Attorney's Office has reviewed the proffer agreement dated December 1, 2006, and found it to be legally sufficient and in acceptable legal form. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. Plans submitted with this rezoning application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes and Standards. The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. SOUTH INDEPENDENCEi\CQUISIT10N' ~genda Iteql15 pgg$'J5 AERIAL OF SITE LOCAtiON SOUTH INDEPENDENCEACQU1SI1fpN Agenda Ite-1'T115 p 16 t..::L. '. l...... $1\0 Cl. W U. c: \0 tJ') " tJ') rv c w ~ ~ ~ 5 '. ih "'!' -<; ,~ ;- <- !-' . " . -g ::J ::..0 .3 iJ ~. ,). " " - :;.. - ,~ " "" ;C,: "Q; ,e ~j 2 ~I ~ 'I' ~] -I ~ %' ~ :5 12. ~ PROPOSED CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT PLAN SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION Agenda Ite Pag ~ - c ro r..I1 J:S !Jj ru c C) ~ CJ ~ ~~.~ ~ -~.! <:: ;'..J"-::'; OPEN SPACE EXHlalT SOUTH INDEPENDENCEACQUISITION Agenda Item 15 Pa~J8 RESIDENTIAL LINEAR .BARK LAYOUT SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISI N Agenda It 15 Pag, 9 " .. ,,,..:.,~,,,,,, .,' PROPOSED SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS ..... SOUTH INDEPENDENCE.ACQUISITION Agenda Itern 15 P~Q~.go ! PROPOSED SINGLE-FAMilY DWElliNGS ..,. ",.'" SOUTH INDEPENDENCEACQUISITION Agenda I tern. 15 , Page 21 PROPOSED TOWNHOUSES' SOUTH INDEPENDENCEACQUISITION Agenda Iten'l15 P~g~'g2 PROPOSED TWIN. TOWNHOUSES' SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION Agenda!t '15 P .:$ PROPOSED TWIN TOWNHOUSES > (l) - LU (l) 'U ...- r.fJ (l) C> ctS .... c: o :- u.. ......, (l) (l) :- ......, r.fJ SOUTH INDEPENDENCEACQUISITION Agenda Item15 Pa"g$.?4 c o .'- +-' ~ > <D W <D '"0 (j) lI.- o .~ CD +-' C PROPOSED TWIN TOWNHOUSES SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISI]ION Agenda It 15 P 25 PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL CLUBHOUSE SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISIl';ION Agenda Iter;mt5 Pa:ge26 "0 C ro "0 ro 0"0 a: .... ro <D > C <D C- <t:g wCO w <D <D (,) (,) C .S <D """0 0... C C <D 00.. 0'l<D c"O ._ C -- C.c 0_ .... :::l ...... 0 ~(/) C :a '5 CO MULTIFAMILY DWELLINGS" SOUTH INDEPENDENCE.ACQUISITJON Agenda Item 15 Pag~g7 CD :t:::: (l) CD ..c: -- o -- "- o .>:: CD -- c: (f) D'l C "'0 ::J CO MULTIFAMILY DWELL;INGS:' SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITlpN Agenda I tern 15 p 0) c :a 'S co >. '- o ..... (J) I '- ::J o u.. MULTIFAMILY DWELLINGS SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION }\genda Item 15 P~ge 29 MULTIFAMILY CLUBHOUSE SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION Agenda Iterfu15 . ,Page 30 COMMERCIAL GATEWAY RENDERING SOUTH INDEPENDENCEti\CQUISITION Agenda Item 15 Pgge31 <( N <( "..l c.. :w o i')) uJ l<: 5 ~ 5 < ~ a: w ~ '" COMMERCIAL GATEWAY LAYOUT SOUTH INDEPENDENCEACQUISITION Agenda Item 15 Page <32 PHOTO OF TYPICAL ARCHITECTURE OF COMMERCIAL SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION Agenda Item 15 , Page 33 PHOTO OF TYPICAL ARCHITECTURE OF COMMERCIAL SOUTH INDEPENDENCE;~CQUISITION Agendalt~~t5 Page<H COMMERCIAL ARCHITECTURALCHAAACTER PHOTO OF TYPICAL ARCHITECTURE OF COMMERCIAL; .' SOUTH INDEPENDENCEACQUISrtilON ,A.genda Itero15 P~g~@5 - ~ !-"v ;;:- ~ ~ ::. V ;:: ~ 0 ,...., :.1":. -' <- ~ ~ ~ s ,... ... .... - :<: = :- 'J: Z Z ;....; ...... ~ :t. :.; ~ e: f: :> > .- Z 15 ::J e<; "'l' ..., ~ r.. ~ ,-. '-' '-' z ...::; Vi J". '/'. ,... '-'"' ~ ~ :: z -' ,.... x ~ V; a z ffi ~ G "" ::.! ;; TYPICAL SCREENING OF COMMERCIAL USES' SOUTH INDEPENDENCEACQUISITION Agenda Item 15 Pa:ge.?6 Conditional Zoning Cnange: from R-5D (0 Conditional A-24, Conditional 8-4. Conditional A- i 2 with PD-H2 Overlay 1 I 09/09/03 CHANGE OF ZONING (0-2 & R-5D to Granted Conditional B-2), (R5-D to Conditional 0-2) Granted 2 12/09/03 CHANGE OF ZONING (Conditional Denied B-2 to Conditional 0-2) 07/01/97 CUP (housing for seniors) Granted CHANGE OF ZONING (R-10 to Conditional B-2) 3 09/23/03 MOD to proffers Granted 4 09/25/01 MOD to proffers Granted CUP (fuel sales) 5 04/14/98 CHANGE OF ZONING (R-5D to Granted SOUTH INDEPENDENCEACQUISITION Agenda Item 15 Conditional B-2) 6 03/25/03 CUP (bulk storage) Granted 06/22/99 CHANGE OF ZONING (R-50 to Granted 04/09/96 Conditional B-2) Denied CHANGE OF ZONING (R-50 to B-2) 7 02/08/00 FLOODPLAIN VARIANCE Granted CHANGE OF ZONING (R-10 to R-50 with PO-H2 overlay) 11/10/98 CHANGE OF ZONING (R-10 to Denied Conditional A-12) 8 08/27/02 CHANGE OF ZONING (R-50 to Granted Conditional B-2) 9 07/06/04 CUP (bulk storage) Granted 02/09/96 MOD of proffers Granted 07/11/95 CHANGE OF ZONING (1-2 to B-2) Granted 10 02/29/96 CHANGE OF ZONING (R-50 to Granted Conditional B-2) 11 11/14/88 CUP (adult home) Granted 12 09/22/98 CHANGE OF ZONING (R-10 to A-12 Granted with PO-H2 overlav) 13 02/23/99 CHANGE OF ZONING (R-50 to B-2) Denied 14 07/09/96 AMENDMENT TO LAND USE PLAN Granted ZONING HISTORY , '-;..',_._':',,":....__'T..' SOUTH INOEPENDENCEACQUISITI0N Agenda Ite~15 vgqg~?~ ... z . ... ~ a.a; ~ ;: ~ ~ ~ ::; rI:i ~ U :n - Q c '" '- , Q ~ ~cB '~~'E ~ '?= ~ f;~2 QC: 'E S;-'E fl!= 5 ~38 .;: ~ g ~o_.;; ~ c-'s ~ :e == ;:';; Pilet ~...=~ ~;:;3 ., >~;j ~!i! ~~ Q1ii~c ..J oS.:: ~ <l"i$"~ Z ~.- ~~c O;';G~ ;::,;:::1 Ii! S ~:g..;....o-v ~"'i.;; 2! ~Qi~~ ~ l.~ -n"i '" := ~rle~ e It'Es ~ ~ ~;; i ~~l~ ~ = <:: ~ u ~., -: ~:a ~ ::i!~.2 J! <> ~'-s ~ 5'~i oF.. '" ~~8 ~ -... .~~ 5 - Iii, e ~~5 0...- ~ ;2 ~.~ ~e:~ .g ~3 0.,..., -, e w.:; JS~a '.. &... ~..;; e~~ ",.cu 'Oo,'\n,foI} ._ -V-i ,,_ "5i;"r;: , .~ ~..g '0 i] l~ ~'6 g M ..;.,5 ....-~ ~QJ:!-g ,g.?;-gu "iOJ~ e.=~> 1i;~-!! ~-'.~ Qo'~ -= -..... - ~-.~ ~,g t g~~ '0 ~ e':: .&!i~;;; SI ~ ,.z:u -,,;; C ~ fi - ;a -5 n B ,=-~ ~ l# :?., :;_iJ ~ <~ :,1:.._- :-_::=.A: ~ - Wol. ..0 C - ;;:_-~~_ o ~~~::;f 'a:t e.~ f! .e.~ 8 .~ geE .~ ~ 1! ~ ~.== t~'S ~.'~,~ i:;::: ,g ~ g-s~ ~- ~!.E?P~ ,5': ~:::--: ~o -:'- ~,~ ",g.-':e::;c""gl:l:= ~'~::;~~S'! ~ ~- ~ ~ 5 , :I ~<=: ~"'..~!i! 5l(,.l a ~ ~.; ~:... '? f"l. = ., e ~ ~=tt^';:l\fiB$!=f(""ti!i - 0 _ ,,= S k'. '" ~ E _ -~ ~ ";;:: ~ 0 3: - - 'I:>, ~ .~ j "5 tg .s .g ] .~ ~ ~ JHl '" :j a "",a 0 t.~ g~~~~~::a-QQoS::: ':;..= !:(: -.6 Q._~:;t) 'Q.~ tIS.llI'l'-C~.~~tb;:"_~ ]'~ '0 ': '" .l!! ! ,S ~'i"': ~_~ ~~,.~~ 5..2 ~~ ,= ~ ;; ~ ~'~~ ~ g ~.:; ~ g~~~iu.o::~5S ~~::1 ~~= ::t~. ceo ~S g] B15,! ~~ s.: ~~~~ ~!~_5 ~o"E, 8..gE~~ .c"s~gb4a 100' ~ Q~:;~ 13 ~ t} Ai S 5"' ~ Q ;: ~.~ . .~C'~Sl~,,":;!se,=- -.:!:;-_o~~c;~<I~=- E::= 0: c.=:= ~:!t = ~~, -<., Oli......,., '" "-::: 0 ",,.:.' .: ..g ~E ~ 1; ~.s -.5 ~ "ii -= Mt. ~ 1::s ~Eg..g ~ ~ '; E 6 ~ a i ~ ~ ,.~ ] ~ !j ~~ ~f a 0 l! "0 ~ 1: " '" 'is ,OJ ~ 'J :0 e 'U' ~= ~ -s Qo..,Q.......* .~ .$ e ~E ='~- ~ Co..;; ;:t. ;r&..; .s]-s - "" !: '~1! ;:, '2 ~ ""'.- l! 51$- -'00 [~s gz-~ <:'~'~ ~.~ ,g t:: &."'" II -'- "" <=> .;c .. S e"" IS. I~": l" ';j,~ I..:::. 0. 4 tit..c: c:__-- .- Co. .... c: 15'-.... ...- . ~c:~tIj ,/::'-1:<: !'1!<:a&"g -= .co-v. .::-~,!:! ~E r- .:s ""!- ~ 15] '" 8.- t:: - ,~~.! ~ua~.~e rZ.;:i-gl!- rO~_-g. If:: .. "...- i< .", 1l 0 "2 'u 3'" ~ 0 1- - 1;! '- tl "- v ,...;v.. = if:: ~ J- ~ g. ,- - ,-.- ,....:= :::.... 'Ill R ;a r:;''' iu a.i! !:: l: ...,........,.... ,~~'" ~,,~ - ~s;' ... 9- 'UI !f~~ ~, ~ - ~r " ~ ...: ~ '" ~ "" u ] Z Q :2 a - ~ 8- ! ~ a ~ ~ :;I) ;; "" :.. - ;; .. :3 .. ~ '2 E Z QU, Ct ~ ~ s w ~. >. ;3 ~ -< ~ :=: \ ! ~i ~I ., ~I , ' ~~\';;l '~ NOI.IV3I'IddV ~NINOZ:nI 'IVNOILIUN03 "'" .. e ~ o q '" .~ .; 'l> ~ '" E ~ 1l :: .~ c .. ~ <5 !Z ~ :E .... E- <: ~ ';LJ. ~ :=: ;;l v; o ..:l U v; Q ~- ~ ~: e ,:: :c ~ e:. ;J~ 0 ~ .~ <;i ~I ~~ ~1; i~ =t:: ~~ ~!:; ~~,ge ....i~ <:: ;,~ ~li~ ~ € ~~~ ~~I~ ~ ~~i~ '~lll: .-= ",,0 <.: ~ :~~I:SS i.s~; ~lg ts~_:t ~cr.,"~ Wo ~ 1:: .3 H """,i Q :; ~,~~ f~ 'i ~l~ 1~~ :~L~,g~ 1~1l:i! ~~~~,. :;;_~IEl! ~ '~::3 ~ ... m '-_- ~ _' l ~ll~i ... tfjt.<<e;~ ~ .~~ Q ;II " ~ ;I; ::s .rJ -g d ;g~ "ae ~ ~ - ~ b~ .g'~ ~; ~~ ~ .c. - ::1 ;;~ ~_1 ..:. ~ =::;: _J ~3 .~ .~ ~ ~!-' ~J: 1~..8 ];.E!d - .,:::.. .'-<q '.~'~ :., t, 'il!il-,"" J:: ''':is .. ; 'j ;;s~~ ~~~!]II ::3~~~ ~i ~~! ~ ,g '0 ~ o Ii ~ -;g &; """ 8 e s< 5' 'I - ,~ : '0 >: .... ';;:::'0 ~ ~~" 5 ~~~ sa,~; ~ -:.~"Q o.~ ~';;...: ~s ~{;E ~w-, fa .t ~ ~ ~ Q '~Q. ~...::: f5~~ ~":; z'~,::.: ~~~E >- ~.= "':I....... :::; ~ ~ ~~ ~s~ e~ ~ ~'E" ~z ~ ~ ~'~:~;'i: ~ ~ 8.~ ~ 0 ~~8~t~ ~~~-=.1=~ 1: .~ .;:J S .'1> ~t~.~~ '~F ~: t; ~ gi!:=8.e ,-.., ... ? 0, iij .:: ~~.d..e... -:S ~E u ~ -,<o'=-=i! ,~ '"- ~ -- ':r, s. ;-'S ~ 5 .~= ~ . ....._0_ ~ <> &; E " S i '" E o gl ~ =-t ;;t ~ ~~;I~ .. ;~ I~ ~l~! M ~~ '" ~ IJ"~ ~ .~ Z ."" 1J; ~- E t:- ~ ......; _~ E c~ ~~' ]~ :;::."::: '1 $:: -~ E~ ..~ 0- .. ~,~ ..E~ ;; 5" .;::. ~ .,J: ~- .~~ g $ "~ .:i ..a il'l c: ~,~ z;'E :j"E o ~ ,~ &; i ::; ci. :is ~ ~ c 1:: R .s e ~ u .. ... Q <; .~ E .~ g ~.~ d ."- ~i - .. ~ 0 ~"'Q ... ~ 0/<; ~~ ';"f ._ ~u ~c D'~ r.i t: <.: .g. ~ ... ... f it .: ,Z l~ " t:- 8 .. ;.. Q <; .!!: = t,2 c - ~ ~ 0'2 ;....d: 't:~ &.; ;2 .~ ~! i .." x " ~ c:-~ ~~ ~ ~ j1 ~~ I ~ t .~ ~.s u o~ D :;; 4i -= ~ !; .5 ~ .. '" '" .J: '" ~ ~ '" '", .~ :> ~ -~x ;,,; .E '- e 0 ~z ;... oS c. C '" o ~ "3:>- ;~~ - " ~~ au .z 0 ~:E ;;:.. ::l .... V1 eo" 1;; e .. .5 ~ ~ '- 0' i:. ::> ~ '" -5 1$. '" $) '" ;... e C. E ... .. <:; c; .'" !E o .. -= ~ '" ::: ;; =: ~ .~ ~ ~ .; '" ;... :::: DISCLOSURE STATEMENT SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION Ag~nda Iterri15 Pa.g~:39 EXHffiIT A LIST OF BUSINESSES WITH AFFILIATED BUSINESS ENTITY RELATIONSHIP WITH APPLICANT* Equity Title Company, L.L.e. Greendale, L.L.C. L.M. Sandler & Sons, Inc. SAS Investors Sandler at Ashville Park, L.L.e. Sandler at Brenneman Farm, L.L.C. Sandler at Bmwn Farm, L.L.e. Sandler at BrovvnFarm II, L.L.C. Sandler at Lexington, L.L.C. Tate Terrace Realty Investors, Inc. Tidewater Mortgage Services, Inc. Tidewater Finance Company Today Homes, Inc. Wedgewood Associates, L.L.C. Westview Plaza Associates, L.P. *business entities with properties located in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia DISCLOSURE STATEMENT SOUTH INDEPENDENCE'ACQUISI-pION Agenda ,lterJ')15 ,P?'9E310 EXHIBIT B LlST OF SERVICE PROVIDERS Faggert & Frieden, P.C. 222 Central Park Avenue Suite 1300 Virginia Beach, Virginia 23462 Legal Services Troutman Sanders LLP 222 Central Park Avenue Suite 2000 Virginia Beach, Virginia 23462 Legal Services Equity Title Company, LLC 200 Golden Oak Court Suite 425 Virginia Beach, Virginia 23452 Title Work Looney Ricks Kiss (LRK) 209 1 Oth Avenue South #408 Nashville, Tennessee 37203 Architectural Services Engineering & Testing Services, Inc. (ETS) 240 Mustang Trail Suite 8 Virginia Beach, Virginia 23452 Engineering Services Kim1ey-Horn & Associates, Inc. Suite 300 501 Independence Parkway Chesapeake, Virginia 23320 Engineering Services Rouse-Smne Associates. Ltd. Land Surveyors and Mapping Consultants 333 Office Square Lane Virginia Beach, Virginia 23462 Surveying Services Lewis Scully Gionet Landscape Architects 1919 Gallows Road, Suite 110 Vienna, VA 22182 Landscaping Services Page 1 of2 DISCLOSURE STATE.MENt\" SOUTH INDEPENDENCE.t\CQUISrlJION Agenda Itel"J"l.15 PCJ:g~>.41 Bryant B. Goodloe, P,C. Traffic Impact Anaylsis 8809 Adams Drive East Suffolk, VA 23433 URS Corporation Engineering Due Diligence 277 Bendix Road, Suite 500 Virginia Beach, V A 23452 3279S6v I Page 2 of2 Traffic Impact Services Engineering Services DISCLOSURE STATEMENT SOUTH INDEPENDENCE~CQUISIl?ION Agendaltet'Q..15 Pc,i.g~12 Item #15 South Independence Acquisition, L.L.c. Change of Zoning District Classification Southwest and southeast corners of South Independence Boulevard and Princess Anne Road and 1632 Salem Road District l/District 7 Centerville/Princess Anne April 11, 2007 REGULAR Barry Knight: Mr. Secretary, the next item to be heard. Joseph Strange: The next item is item 15, South Independence Acquisition, L.L.c. An application of South Independence Acquisition, L.L.C., for a Change of Zoning District Classification from R-5D and R-lO Residential District to Conditional A-24 Apartment District, Conditional B-4 Mixed Use District, and Conditional A-12 Apartment District with PD-H2 Overlay on property located on the southeast and southwest corners of South Independence Boulevard and Princess Anne Road and 1632 Salem Road, District 7, Princess Anne with 32 proffers. Barry Knight: Mr. Nutter, welcome back. R.J. Nutter: Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, Vice Chairman, it is a pleasure to be back. For the record again, my name is R.J. Nutter, and I represent the applicant on this last matter on your agenda, which I'm sure glad. This application, which was before you, and I hope Kathy is coming back, because we keep losing people here. David, as you remember, cannot vote or participate in this application. But having said that, this was heard by the Commission a month ago. I thought a very good and great debate and discussion of issues on this application. I think what I can highlight about that is that there was staff recommendation of approval, a very strong recommendation at that. A recommendation, that complied with the Comprehensive Plan, unlike the existing zoning of the property, which is all townhouse or single-family residential development. Our Comprehensive Plan, as you know, cities this as an opportunity site, one for mixed-use development; so, this was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, where the existing zoning and existing land uses by-right were not. This application had extraordinary high quality development to it. It accumulated a large amount of property. Frankly, what is being developed is in a uniform and a planned matter, not as a series of broken up parcels by separate developers with different plans. It has a common theme and a common plan. All of those things were true then, and they continue to be true now. What we were asked to do was to consider, and we agreed to go back and to do that, was to look at whether or not, and having hearing the debate, was there in fact some reduction in density that we could make to this application. Even though staff recommended approval, and their relative service level had in fact been maintained, we were asked to do that. We did go back, and we met quite honestly with ourselves and looked at what we could do to do Item #15 South Independence Acquisition, L.L.C. Page 2 that. The result, we voluntarily agreed to reduce the density of the project by 100 units overall. That is by the way an 8.5 percent reduction overall in the unit count on this property. Then, in addition to that, we would take an additional 100 units of the remaining property, which is another 8.5 percent, and we could convert that to a use with far less impacts, mainly an age-restricted community, which has as you know, no impact on schools, which is number one. Number two, has a much lower traffic impact, because there are fewer drivers, there are fewer cars, and they can't drive. We're getting close to this age everyday around here, by the way. Unless they are on the Planning Commission, they don't drive as much and as City Council as well. But generally, it is more of off- peak hour situation. Generally speaking, the people marketing this area are older than 55. I would tell you that it has a reduced impact. Quite frankly, we lost almost 200 units as a result of this. What that has done, it has resulted in the following staff modifications to the recommendations. First and foremost, as you may recall last time, school reports here, and they were conservative as well. The school reorted in the last application we were impacting the increased number of total students in all schools by 25 students under our previous application. Today, with these modifications, we have resulted, and the School Board confirming that, we will have actually 46 fewer students with these modifications than we would if we developed by right. We've gone and shifted almost 70-something students with the cours~ of the changes that I just mentioned. In addition to that, the traffic impact study has been revised. We have modified that as well; so, that it shows now an increased traffic count of over 870 vehicle trips per day. That is an average vehicle scenario, which is again, a real time, very real effect. But more importantly, what that does is it makes this application, in my opinion, not only a strong application from the context of the planners and the professionals through you who evaluate these applications, but it shows the willingness by the developer to honestly go in and reduce the density, which is what is driving how this works by the way. How to make these improvements there is a real effort to try and accommodate efforts raised by those who live in the area. I would tell that I'm certain there will be people who say we want more reductions. I would tell you that my client is here to tell you that they would like more houses than the 1,180 they proposed. There is an impossible balancing act here. So, I would urge you to look toward your staff, which is recommending approval, even more strongly than they did previously. The staff has told you independently that the impacts on infrastructure are even less than it was before, when they recommended approval. I'm just going to spend a few moments with you on that topic because some of the other points that I want to talk about are workforce housing, which is a very, very important component of this application. But first, let me tell you about the traffic report, and even with the traffic report improvements that we've talked about, why this is a better application than by-right. First of all, this application includes almost a million dollars in off-site road improvements that would not be possible if it was developed by right. So that means you would have the same traffic impacts, and the public would have to come up with, to address the same traffic loads that were doing here that is not contained in the study. It is a million dollars that wouldn't be done. These are not just adjacent issues.;These are intersections a quarter-mile away from this site. That is very rare, number one. Number two. The traffic report has approached this because traffic for the city tries to Item #15 South Independence Acquisition, L.L.C. Page 3 take a conservative stance. Jay, you asked this question in the early morning session. You alluded to the very same question. Wait a minute. If this is going to work and were taken up and it is going to work within our plans, are we taking up capacities of others? You kind of alluded to that very thing. Your staff told you that they made us use a very conservative background number to make sure that we add a one percent traffic increase to that roadway every year. We've done that and the numbers reflect still no problem with those. If you take the actual traffic counts on that road with background number, they are under one percent. We've used a very conservative standard for you to make sure that future growth is handled very well and professionally. The second thing I will tell you is that the retail component of this portion of the property is a very exciting "Main Street." It's not a-stand-alone big box retail. This is a Main Street retail. The traffic generation numbers for a Main Street retail operation are very different than a traffic generation for a stand-alone on the Depot, 150,000 square feet. They made us use a more aggressive 150,000 square foot stand-alone facility. That is fine. The numbers still work. But the biggest component that we accepted for you, and I hope they will look at it again in the future, is that when the strongest components of this application, and what the Comprehensive Plan is calling for in this area, is mixed-used development. And by that, I mean a true mixture of uses where the streets are in line. The bikeways, the pedestrian ways are all intertwined so that people within the development can get to the commercial new development without having to go out on the major arterials. When you do that, you reduce the traffic impact. Now in this case, the Traffic Engineering Department used a three percent capture ratio. The standard for a mixed-use development is 10 to 15 percent. So, even with those numbers, I wanted you to know that we approached this very conservatively. Even with all three of those conservative elements, staff still finds that this is still within their levels of service and reduction comes further. But again, I want to tell you more about this application, other than just traffic. Frankly, we would be deluding ourselves if we think this is all about traffic. This is about an ~pplication that has all the things that the Comprehensive Plan have asked for. It has mixed-use, quality development, overall planned community, not just haphazard. Ed Weeden: R.J.? R.J. Nutter: I see. Ed, I'll take you with me to a wedding buddy. I know we'll be on time. But, the other is this contains affordable housing. This is the first project in the city that has really gone out of its way to make sure that happened. As you recall, and Dot Wood couldn't be here today, but I will tell you very sincerely, and Dot wanted to make sure, and as you did, I'm certain, that when we were looking at the recent densities, we didn't wash away affordable housing in the process. From a developer standpoint, it is harder because affordable housing is more expensive. For them, it is a harder product, because they got to sell it number one, which is easier to do than we think. The other is they have to build it in a way that the profit motivation on those units frankly goes away because of the increased densities. So, they would have loved to have gotten rid of that element, but that didn't happen. They made sure of that. So, in fact, we kept the ratio higher than the 12 percent we were using newer. This way, we were guaranteeing 62 Item #15 South Independence Acquisition, L.L.c. Page 4 affordable units in the project were about to sell. This is more than just about traffic counts. It is about mixed-use, the Comprehensive Plan, school reductions, and affordable housing, and a really high quality development. So, we would ask for your endorsement. We appreciate the time you've given me. Mr. Weeden, I appreciate the indulgence. You didn't yell at me this time. So, I'll be happy to answer anu questions you or the Commissioners may have Mr. Chairman. Barry Knight: Are there any questions of Mr. Nutter at this time? Ms. Anderson? Janice Anderson: Can you go over the percentage of the workforce housing? It was 81, and I know it got reduced to 62 because the reduction of the other. I'm losing. My math is not coming out. R.J. Nutter: In fact, the reason we decided to drop the percentages, and the previous proffers had percentages. The reason why we dropped the percentage ratio and went with just a number is because if there are few units built, we didn't want to base it upon the number of it being reduced any further. That was very important and of concern to the Council member of not having a good amount of workforce housing on the property. We just wanted to get to a number. I want to have a guarantee to have less built for any reason then I want to know it is going to be there. So, at that point Ms. Anderson, we were using actually we were using 12 percent of the properties of the residential in this portion. Now, at some point, we looked at using our percentage based upon the increase in density. So, we would take the increase, which is a whole different number altogether. So, I said, look, if we apply 12 percent, and we reduce the units here by 100. That would be a 12-unit reduction. So, that is how we went from 81 down to 70. And then we said what happens with the age-restricted housing because that is also a little profit mode. We want some capture ratio, but it shouldn't be the same 12 percent. So, that is where we agreed to 62, and that is the number that would be above the 12 percent ratio, and still qualify. We wanted to stay above 60 affordable housing units in the project. That was very, very important. They were thinking in excess of a reduction in density from an impact perspective down by about 17 percent. They wanted to make sure they didn't part 17 percent all the way over and that it was applied to a higher number. That is how they got to 62. I know it is confusing. We had too many formulas based upon different portions of the property. And, I thought that was going to be confusing; so, let's just go with a number. That is how we got to 60. But to guarantee that number without any further reductions. If there are further reductions, it is 62. Barry Knight: I see what you're saying. Ms. Anderson? You've reduced the number roughly by 20 percent of the workforce housing. You said you've reduced the number of housing units by 8.5 percent. Then on the age restricted you've reduced them by 8.5 percent, but we're not going to give them the 8.5 percent figure. We're going to give them half as much. RJ. Nutter: Right. Item #15 South Independence Acquisition, L.L.C. Page 5 Barry Knight: It looks like you've reduced our workforce housing by the tune of 20 percent, where you've reduced the amount of overall housing by about 13 percent. RJ. Nutter: Actually, it is 17 percent. It depends on how you treat that extra 100. That is why it is a very difficult number. If we were to apply the same 12 percent ratio, and that's what I did, we would have been below. We would have been in the 50s. We did not want to do that. We wanted to be above 60s. The reason why the percentages vary Mr. Knight is because the percentage of 82, a smaller percentage has a bigger impact than it does of a percentage of 1,000 units. That is why. Barry Knight: You're exactly right. RJ. Nutter: Had we applied the 12 percent uniformly to the reduction, it would have come out to the mid 50s. So, we increased it to 62. Barry Knight: It depends on where you apply your percentage. R.J. Nutter: I couldn't agree with you more. We will never win this debate, because it is impossible to explain to anybody. Barry Knight: You can win if you put 70 workforce houses in there as opposed to the 62. RJ. Nutter: We've come awfully far as you know. We are very, very happy with this, and feel like we worked very hard to make these numbers work. Barry Knight: Are there any questions at this of Mr. Nutter? Mr. Bernas? Jay Bernas: One question that I guess that has been illuminated since the last application was the prospect of having a senior living facility somewhere on the site, which would further reduce the impacts to schools and to the roads. Has anything come of that? RJ. Nutter: First of all, that is where we committed to a 100 units being age-restricted. Jay Bernas: But the age-restricted is? RJ. Nutter: 55 and older. Assisted living is typically a unit where you have some communal activities. Eating is communal activity or some recreational facilities are communal activities. People own units, if you will, but within a structure. That is something they are looking at still. They have not talked with a developer who does that or maybe does not do that. But they are well aware of the proximity of the property to the new Sentara facility, not to mention the new Bon Secours facility. So, it is just something they have not yet committed. We are still looking at that avenue. But I didn't want to hold out something that wasn't going to be the case. But I can you Mr. Bernas that is something they are looking at very seriously. Item #15 South Independence Acquisition, L.L.c. Page 6 Jay Bernas: One more question. Can you go into a little bit more detail about the type of commercial development that is proposed? You talked a little bit more technically about the capture ratio. Can you talk a little more detail about who you're marketing some of the retail to, and how they're less destination as opposed to the more to the neighborhood development community as a whole? R.J. Nutter: I'll be happy too. As you know, retail is oriented in this area right here (pointing to PowerPoint). And, we are looking at this facility for a grocery store. And, it would be a new grocery store that is currently not in this market. I know there was some comment about that last time, because all the known players were in the market; so, therefore, that was the end of the world. Well, there are new players who are looking to come into the market, and we're talking to at least one of them right now about this facility. By the way Jay, if that was to happen, the capture ratios inside those facilities go up to 15 percent. As you can imagine, people go daily to the grocery store quite often. They could go to that facility by internal road system without having to go out on the roadway. But the other is a "Main Street" market plan. The Main Street runs here and here and down through here. This is kind of a half main street. And, I believe in the book that we provided to you, we have some renderings. They are two-story structures where we have some office above. We have retail above, much like you see in portions of Town Center. I believe, this is in Northern Virginia, if I'm not mistaken. This is the kind of feel we are trying to attract. The type of retailers that we are looking for are across the board. Office facility, office supply facilities, Starbuck coffee, as you can imagine, bread and sandwich shops, Panera Bread, etc. Many others like that are interested in this area. We may have an increase in office and things. Right now, we're a little over 40,000 square feet of office. We may increase that. So, it is really going to be pushing those, but we're driven predominately by the rather or not we can do the grocery store deal. But we are trying very hard on that. But it is mostly Main Street service oriented. We have on- site parking for that, and some parking that fits in the adjacent parking lots that we have ground level parking. This is unique, and that is why we're very excited about it. Not only is the housing quality high but the quality of the retail is very high as well. I realize that I didn't get a chance to talk to you about the accessway that we talked about. I know that your staff is here and part for that very reason. But, I would tell you that we've also modified our application to exclude. We had proposed two right-in!right-outs on Princess Anne Road. And, we had eliminated the one on the southern portion of the property altogether. From no right-in or no right-out. I'll show you. We had proposed a right-in! right-out at this location. We have eliminated that entirely. We're going to have access to this site only by virtue of South Independence Boulevard. We also proposed a right- in/right-out at this location on Princess Anne Road and we have modified this application to include only a right-in only and to eliminate a right-out movement. And, I did have the benefit of hearing Phil Davenport's presentation to you earlier and so forth to all the policy reasons surrounding this access way. I will tell you that the sole reason why we're seeking a right-in to this property is for one reason and one reason only. We are trying to reduce the impact on this intersection. A right-in here would allow us, quite frankly, to divert traffic that would have to go to this intersection. It has to go to the end of the site, Item #15 South Independence Acquisition, L.L.c. Page 7 to the end of the site without having to go through this intersection. A portion of the people who enter the property by this accessway, will in fact, go out here, and then come back and impact that intersection. Now, two things I will point out to you. Number one. They are going to have to do that movement twice anyway. So, a certain percentage of them don't change. But a percentage of the people who come in this direction are going to do another thing. They are going to come out and go either inside the neighborhoods using the internal road system or they are going to come in here and come out in this direction on South Independence and go down South Independence, and thereby avoid this intersection on either of those two scenarios. We're not trying to upset the balance of power on the southern end ofthe city or the policy. We're trying to reduce impacts on the intersection. And, it also came up, and I'll just pass these out to you, that the Commonwealth Transportation Board and VDOT had committed to making this a limited access highway, and I will tell you that when they were condemning the Spence's property for the widening of Princess Anne Road, they filed an application, that, in fact, would have taken the access way from the Spence Farm to his property. Barry Knight: Mr. Bernas? Is he still answering your question? Jay Bernas: I was going to ask the next question anyway. I was going to ask him the question about the right-inlright-out. R.J. Nutter: I'll pass these out. These are just simply copies that after that was done, the Commonwealth Transportation Board voted to revised their position, and not take an access way into the Spence Farm from Princess Anne Road. They revised the Certificate of Take to reflect that. This is the court order to allow that reflection to occur. So, I can tell you that at no time were the Spence's compensated for the loss of the access. As a matter of fact, the State came back and specifically said we are going to pay you less, because we're not going to take it, and we're not going to call Princess Anne Road at your location a limited access highway. So, does the City still have a policy? Absolutely, they do. We understand that, but I did want to let you know the sole reason for our request is not to undermine Mr. Davenport's policy or Council's policy. It is try to reduce traffic impacts on South Independence and Princess Anne Road. Mr. Redmond, if you don't mind, I'll pass these out to you. Barry Knight: Are there any other questions for Mr. Nutter at this time? Okay. Thank you Mr. Nutter. RJ. Nutter: My pleasure sir. Thank you for your indulgence by the way. Barry Knight: Mr. Strange, the next speaker, please? Joseph Strange: Speaking in support of the application we have Tim McCarthy from Empower Hampton Roads. Item #15 South Independence Acquisition, L.L.C. Page 8 Barry Knight: Welcome back Tim. Tim McCarthy: Welcome. Thank you. Nice to be here. My name is Tim McCarthy and I represent Empower Hampton Roads. I'm the Chairperson of the Housing Equity Committee. It is a pleasure again to speak before you. As you know, Empower Hampton Roads represents some 35 churches in our area, and we have been organizing over the past few years around the issue of workforce housing. We've worked for this and on this issue for the past 2 to 3 years, particularly in Virginia Beach. We've also had the opportunity to form the roundtable on workforce housing and we're now meeting into our second year. It has been an opportunity to bring together the advocates in our community as well as the developers and the builders, to search for a solution to try to find ways in which we can accomplish workforce housing, and address workforce housing in our community. We're now, as I said, into our second year of that. I'd like to think the dialogue that we've formed there is seeing some fruits today, both in the facts that the issue has been lifted up, and well recognized before you and City Council, and within our community, as well as the recognition that there needs to be the formation of a new public policy with regard to workforce housing. That being said, we believe that the best public policy is forged when all factions are heard and all voices are brought to the table. And, we feel this has happened in this particular instance. We believe that many of the voices have, if not all the voices, have been heard on this issue in their search for the common good. We endorse this proposal, and we endorsed it at the last public hearing before you, and we now endorse it with its modifications. We recognize the concessions made by the persons who came here representing the civic leagues. We value the voices that they brought to the table, and the points that were made before you. We recognize the good will of the developer, Sandler Brothers, to include workforce housing units in this new development and hope that this is a forecast of things to come, and they would be a leader in our community in terms of inclusive workforce housing units and other developments planned in the City. We also recognize that they made concessions in terms of reducing the overall density. But we also recognize that they are including 62 units of workforce housing. We recognize as well, the shift you have made on the Planning Commission as well as the City Council to endorse the proposed workforce housing program recently brought before you, and endorses heartedly by you, and it is now has gone to the City Council. It will come back again before you with the ordinances, and we also, as the non- profit coalition of faith communities, that we to have made concessions. The concession that we made primarily is that we are hardened believers underneath in terms that we think a mandatory policy would be the best policy. The concession we've made is recognizing that in order to move this forward, that we would endorse a voluntary policy. But overall, we do endorse the proposal before you. We can kind of argue back and forth about the number. My understanding, and perhaps a clarification, is that, by right, they could build 802 units. With the change in density and the reduction in density, they're asking to build 1,080. So that is an increase of 278 units, which by my calculations, is a approximate or exactly 35 percent increase in density. I don't know what the numbers are or how to make the direct computation of what 62 units represent of the total entity. It is probably a little less than what we like. We would probably like to have it a little bit Item #15 South Independence Acquisition, L.L.c. Page 9 more, but we're also wanting to endorse the concept of workforce housing, and recognize the developer in this instance is bound; so, we see this as a good faith effort and a move in the right direction. Ed Weeden: You're time is up. Tim McCarthy: That is it. Barry Knight: Thank you Mr. McCarthy. Are there any questions for Mr. McCarthy? Mr. Bernas? Jay Bernas: Just to clarify. In your opinion, you would probably like to see the 81 units as originally proposed as opposed to the 62 that are proposed? You would be more strongly in favor of more workforce housing units? Tim McCarthy: Well, if we were to look at what the new program that has now passed the General Assembly, and it would apply to the City of Virginia Beach, it would equate a 30 percent increase in density with a 17 percent set a side for workforce housing. So, this would be less than that, but as I said, we still endorse it because we feel that it is a move in the right direction. They're not compelled to do this, and we feel it is something that would be for the good of the City. Barry Knight: Thank you. Are there any other questions? Mr. Strange? Joseph Strange: When you look at these prices range of $170 to $190, I know that the price range is somewhere between 80 to 120 percent of medium income. What group would qualify in there? Would that be towards the higher end or the lower end? Tim McCarthy: Well, I think this is the very issue that has yet been solved. In our estimate, and in all of our discussions, what we hope and believe is that there will be a range of prices available from that 80 to 120 percent. What we don't want to see happen is we don't want to see just a clustering of just that below 120 percent, and that being all that would be available, but that there will be a wide spread from the 80 to 120 percent of the AMI. In order to accomplish that, it is going to take a lot of minds and the City sitting at the table through the Planning Commission director, as well as the Housing Director, in terms of finding ways to resolve that with the builders. It is our intent that it will happen, and we believe, and in good faith, that this will happen in this proposal. Joseph Strange: Okay. Thank you. Barry Knight: Are there any other questions? Thank you. Tim McCarthy: Thank you very much. Item #15 South Independence Acquisition, L.L.e. Page 10 Barry Knight: Mr. Strange? Joseph Strange: The next speaker we have is in opposition, and that is Patricia White. Patricia White: Good afternoon. Barry Knight: Welcome ma' am. Please identify yourself for the record. Patricia White: My name is Patricia White. I live at 3856 Shooting Star Drive. I have my little speech prepared here, but my statement seems inadequate after looking through all this paperwork here, I'm going to have to go through the drawing board. This is some heavy stuff; so, I'm not quite prepared, but I'm going to read what I have here anyway. In an effort to be redundant, I would like to say that I'm here once again opposing the rezoning. I would also like to say that I certainly understand progress, and in order for there to be progress, sometimes, you have to give up something. Now whether that something is voluntary or involuntary, that doesn't make a difference. What makes a difference is the benefit of that progress. If there is no benefit, then it can only be a detriment. The South Independence Acquisition would be detrimental to the quality of life from my neighborhood by bringing more traffic congestion, noise and a population increase. Whether the increase to our areas with housing and/or the businesses, and all these possibilities bring more probabilities of crime. Prom the corner of South Independence Boulevard and Princess Anne Road to yet another new housing development called the Village at Midway Manor is just a little more than one mile then a stone's throw from that, right before the House of United Prayer is yet another development. The schools are already overcrowded, and I know it has become the norm for a classroom to have over 25 students, but that should not be the norm. With more housing, comes more students, and the burden should not be on the teachers. Are there no schools included in this South Independence Acquisition plan? I think not. It seems as though quantity not quality is the name of the game, and that is very sad. It is sad because Virginia Beach is on the verge of losing everything that is special about everything. Virginia Beach is on its way to being just like any other and every other city overcrowded with people and traffic and noise. In closing, I would just like to ask where is the benefit for those who have already poured out our blood, sweat and tears to make this community our home, our sanctuary, a place where we can go when we can go nowhere else. But the point is that we don't want to go anywhere else. So, let common sense prevail and let the South Independence Acquisition application be denied. Thank you. Barry Knight: Thank you Ms. White. Are there any questions for Ms. White? Joseph Strange: The next speaker is W.e. Rosser. Barry Knight: Welcome sir. Item #15 South Independence Acquisition, L.L.C. Page 11 W.e. Rosser: Thank you. William Rosser is my name. I stand here as part of my speech. Last month, I stood here with the intentions to communicate a problem and worked toward a resolution. Unfortunately, I used a word that is considered racial. That word I used was "ghetto," and I want to apologize to anyone that I may have offended. It was my intention to throw a punch but not at a race of people. Today, I choose another word that may offend someone. The word today is "low income," and low-income people, which by the way includes me. I was born 32 years ago in Norfolk and I was raised there. I now live at 1805 Rainbow Court, and my name is William Rosser. This is Rainbow right here (pointing to PowerPoint). This is the whole circular kind of pattern neighborhood. Right there. Thinking about the problems of racism and discrimination, kind of puts South Independence Acquisition into perspective. That is to say, that gangs, and discrimination, racism, and drugs, violence, and the people who are victims of this, prostitution and substandard living. These are issues that are so intertwined into 10w- income life, that it is an equation that mankind has struggled to deal with throughout the history of civilization. So, now, I really can't do much about that by myself, but I can form an opposition to this South Independence Acquisition, and prevent it from becoming part of my son's environment. I'm a father. Myself, me, I can deal with it. I lived in low-income apartment complexes in Norfolk for years. I understand the social codes and the unwritten standards of conduct in which the world in that kind of living and lifestyle conduct. I don't want my son exposed to it when he is impressionable and vulnerable to the containing appeal of risky fund. Gangs involve themselves in twisted forms of entertainment that are irresistible to a bored child. I see this little blinking light must mean that I'm coming up to 45 seconds. Ed Weeden: Do you want to finish your letter? W.C. Rosser: I got a little bit but, I don't think I'm going to make it through there, but I can take some of this out. That is alright. Let me get down to what really matters. The developer circulated a pretty picture of what they want you to believe they will build. If you read the literature they circulated, you might get the impression that this complex is well thought out, and a great idea for the City of Virginia Beach. Well, I think I know who it is good for. I think it is good for the millions of dollars that the developer will add to their collection of millions to their pocket. It is also good generating a good property tax jackpot, which is kind a shot at the City. Sorry guys. They won't tell you that it will clog our already pitiful streets, because we have no interstate access. If we had a bigger picture right here, this whole community is going to have to filter out somehow or that way, because they will make their way right on to the interstate the same way everybody else has using Rosemont, Lynnhaven, Ferrell to Indian River, Witchduck, Newtown and the list goes on. The list of these places are like totally crowded during rush hour traffic. It is bad enough as it is. How many thousands of people are going to be involved in this development? We don't need. You have to remember that it is good to be able to read people, but it is better to able to read between the lines. They're not going to tell you how bad this could be for the people who already live here. I think we have to consider that. I want to say this in closing. I know the truth is hard to believe sometimes; so, if you find Item #15 South Independence Acquisition, L.L.e. Page 12 yourself not wanting to believe it, I understand. I know in my heart that we have an obligation to recognize the people who are not here in this room right now. When a project of this magnitude enforcing this kind of impact on all the surrounding communities that is proposed, we have a responsibility to reasonably consider how does this benefit the people who presently live there? And, I also want to mention that I spent some time and just walked through my neighborhood because I felt strongly about this, and I really didn't know if everybody else was educated about or if they knew what was going on. Again, on Rainbow, we touch this property right here. We don't have a civic league; so, I knew I needed to do something about it. So, I started walking around. I went, I guess, which is Rainbow, all around here to about here, which is a little less than half way around the neighborhood. I actually talked and knocked on doors, and actually talked to about 28 people. I have a petition that is in opposition of the South Independence Acquisition that 25 people signed. I quit right there, because I didn't need to go any further around my neighborhood. The people are not only aware of it, if they're not, I'll make them aware of it. I can get 100 signatures. I can get more than that. People know that this is not necessarily for them. The person who is going to benefit from it is the developer. Ed Weeden: Just pass out the petition. W.C. Rossler: Sure. Barry Knight: Are there any questions for Mr. Rossler? Mr. Rossler, there are no questions for you. Thank you. W.e. Rossler: Thank you. Joseph Strange: Our next speaker in opposition is Barbara Coker. Barbara? Barry Knight: Barbara Coker? Barbara Coker: I decline. Barry Knight: Thank you ma' am. Joseph Strange: Okay. Our next speaker then is Pierre Granger. Barry Knight: Welcome sir. Pierre Granger: Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is Pierre Granger. I'm the President of the Brigadoon Civic League. Brigadoon is a community of 1,100 homes here in the Princess Anne Corridor. I want to thank you for giving me the opportunity to say a few words about the zoning change request by the developer for the proposed Renaissance Park on Spence Farm. We represent 11 civic organizations that signed the Item #15 South Independence Acquisition, L.L.c. Page 13 original letter of concern. Mr. Kelly was called away on military duty, so I am the pinch hitter for Mr. Kelly. I indulge your patience with me. We are united in our concern that the developer's updated proposal does little to mitigate our public safety, traffic congestion and quality of life concerns. This new proposal brings a decrease of 5 percent or a decrease of 859 trips per day. The City of Virginia Beach Master Transportation Plan and the Capital Improvement Program both clearly state that no roadway improvements are proposed for these sections of Lynnhaven Parkway, South Independence Boulevard, Salem Road or Princess Anne. I find it very troubling that a city developer working hand in hand together with the City on a project that can saddle an estimated 20,000 additional trips a day, and in the same docket, propose no new road infrastructure improvements. Two areas of major concern in the City's traffic study are the intersection of Princess Anne Road and Lynnhaven Parkway that will now operate at service level "D". Bottom line, and I quote the traffic study "the specific impact to each vehicle passing through this intersection in the afternoon peak hours is an increase of 14.3 seconds per vehicle, a total delay of 28.2 hours per day. Let me repeat that so that number can sink in, 28.2 hours of additional delay because of this project. The second area of traffic concern is the intersection of Lynnhaven Parkway and South Independence Boulevard. I quote again, from the traffic study, "TIS shows that the proposed development would cause a decrease level of service, which is already overcapacity." Also, and I quote again, " the improvements proffered by this applicant will not bring this intersection to what is considered an exceptional level of service." I took that right out of there. That is a quote in there. Weare not opposed to the idea of mixed-used for this property. We applaud the developer for working hand in hand with the City on this project. We understand the logic and the requirement for mixed-use but we remain fundamentally opposed to the massive density increase and the ensuing traffic congestion, and we would submit that City planners failed to fully analyze the full impact of such a large density increase on the residents of the Princess Anne Corridor. We carry that burden. I know that I'm running out of time. I'm not going to take the additional time the way that some others have. Let me just close with. I would submit that the decisions made today by this board will someday impact someone's safety. Let us fast forward to the future year of the project completion when the developer is long gone, and this board has long since forgotten about this vote. Now imagine fire and rescue and police units fighting through this new gridlock on a call to save a life. Gridlock that will be saddled on us. And who then will stand up and say, "I'm proud of my vote"? Who then will say, "I am happy that I put additional stress on public safety" with this new massive high- density increase. Who will answer to the love ones for this lapse of public safety? I hope that you bear this in mind when you vote today. Finally, I would like to quote George McDonald who said, "the best preparation for the future is the present well seen too and the last duty done." Thank you. Barry Knight: Thank you Mr. Granger. Are there any questions for Mr. Granger? Mr. Bernas? Jay Bernas: Have you offered up anything that you guys would be happy with? Item #15 South Independence Acquisition, L.L.c. Page 14 Pierre Granger: Absolutely. We met with Mr. Dyer, and we met with the public relations firm. Their right is 802 homes. We understand the value of mixed use but they come here saying it is 1,180. No. Their right today is 802 homes. That is their right. We understand that we are not in the overflight path of Oceana, and there is going to be a lot of growth in Kempsville. We're not opposed to mixed-use. Why do they have to add so much growth to the subdivision? Why not hold it at 801 and get their mixed-use? We're coming half way. We're asking for things like police protection. Things are at their maximum right now. I mean, 28 hours of delay at one intersection. Those are the kind of things. If we could defer this for 30 days, and say, come back to 11 percent, and that is still way above the 7,000 routes a day by route. That is the by-right number, 7,000 vehicles a day. They're up to 20,000. Let not kid ourselves here. It is three fold increase. This is a big project. We're not opposed to the development. We're just opposed to the size. We got to fight this traffic everyday. That is our concern.' So, we would say send them back. Let them do the mixed-use and keep it at 802. That is their right. They still get the mixed-use. Barry Knight: Mr. Bernas? Jay Bernas: Just to clarify. 802 resid~ntial, but if traffic is really the issue.... Pierre Granger: That residential, and what we feel is, the 11 communities feel, that residential area, that generates the rush hour traffic. We're not traffic engineers, but we get the fact that if you start piling on additional growth without the infrastructure, which is no plan, we feel that at least we could do is get it back in good faith by the City and the developer down around 800 homes. It just makes sense to us. We're not opposed to the workforce housing. We're not opposed to the mixed-use. We're just saying why are we giving them such a large piece of pie? Why are we doing that in a system that is so stressed already? Jay Bernas: Just to clarify, 800 units, but you're happy with the other proposed apartments? Pierre Granger: We're not opposed. We think that as long as they keep it 802 units, so that is not 500 apartments. It's the 802. It's the good faith estimate. But when they purchased this property, they were looking at 802 units. So, throw in the mixed-use. We know that is going to crowd the infrastructure, but we're realistic. We know that they're working with the City on us. Thank you. Barry Knight: Are there any questions? Joseph Strange: When we did the deferral, it was basically for you to come up with a proposal. Did you actually make this proposal? Item #15 South Independence Acquisition, L.L.c. Page 15 Pierre Granger: Yes sir. We did. We asked for the new plan. We just received it. I think was last Thursday. We contacted Councilman Bob Dyer, and myself, and several of the members of this organization met with the public relations firm with the City Councilman Bob Dyer, and we made the proposal again. It was a very civil meeting. Again, we just wanted to get this down, and we have heard no response from them from our meeting with him, but we did make that proposal. That was our request. Joseph Strange: So what was your stance before you went to the meeting? Pierre Granger: We felt that the proposal that is on the table now isn't enough. It is 859 total trips a day reduction. That is something they went from 7,000 by-right. They went to 21,000 and they came back with 859. That is not a lot ofreduction. So, we are looking at about a 5 percent reduction. We said, come to 11 percent. Get it back to around 802, and get that system so we don't live with gridlock for years to come. That was the concern. Joseph Strange: I mean, if I recall at the last meeting that was your stance then that you would not be objecting to the mixed-use, and if they would keep it at 800 units. Pierre Granger: Right. Joseph Strange: So, in the meantime, when we step back to talk with them, nothing has changed. Your stance hasn't changed at all, but their stance has come down 100 units plus the other 100 units. Pierre Granger: We feel that we are still, I mean we're going up three-fold in traffic density, and I understand your position. Eleven communities are firm that it should stay in good faitp. around the 802 units. That just makes sense. It doesn't make sense to add that density without the roads and the infrastructure. So, you are correct. We met with them. We asked for more of a reduction, and they came back with this proposal. We just want it about 11 percent. We feel, that our position is defendable based on all of the situation in Kempsville. Joseph Strange: But you didn't budge on your position? Pierre Granger: No sir. I don't think we should. Joseph Strange: Okay. I'm just saying. Barry Knight: Are there any other questions? Thank you Mr. Granger. Mr. Secretary? Joseph Strange: That is all the speakers that have signed up. Barry Knight: Mr. Nutter? Item #15 South Independence Acquisition, L.L.C. Page 16 RJ. Nutter: Thank you very much. I appreciate it. First, let me tell you about Ms. White and her comments. I understand, and what she may not and there are so many things. I want her to know that the impact on the schools with this application actually goes down. It actually goes down versus the by-right rule. I hope that she will understand that. The second thing is with Mr. Rossler. I can only tell you that, and I want to really make this very clear. This is not low-income housing. It is not sub-standard construction. This is going to be construction and standards above the homes that are around it. This is not going to be a reduction in the quality. In fact, it is going to be an increase in quality. It is going to increase the planning that has gone around this area that has not occurred, because individual neighborhoods have come in one at a time. This way it is all done at one time. So, I want to really refute this concept that this is somehow some lower standard in the area. It is going to be a higher standard in the area. Their staff has confirmed that for you. Finally, I want to talk about, and again, it should not be about traffic as I told you a hundred times (pause as audience laughs). Ijust want to make sure they are finished. If it is about traffic, then the reason you do traffic studies because we could save ourselves $25,000 in traffic studies. You could fire your staff, and say don't worry about it. Reviewing the traffic studies so you can advise people like us who have to rely on them. You do that so you can have an independent analysis of what is occurring. The independent analysis that they have given to you confirms, as it did in the previous report, that the road network and the study area will not break at the same level of service with the traffic generated by the proposed development as it would by the by- right development without the proper improvements. That is what they tell you. So, that way you don't have to rely upon what the lawyer is telling you or what the developer is telling you. You can rely upon what your staff is telling you. So, I can tell you that, for number one, has moved his position in a very good faith effort, a significant reduction. No matter what you do, someone is going to want less. In our case, our client is always going to want more. This is a very good faith offer, and one that is heavily supported by your staff. Again, this is not about just traffic. This is about workforce housing, mixed- use development, a high quality project, and an accumulation of property. You've always, and your Comprehensive Plan calls for over 20 years ago. This property was scheduled for this type of development. So, I will tell you that this is nothing more than what has been planned and for seen by Comp Plans for the last three Comprehensive Plans. So, it is a good application. I'm proud to be part of it. But, I'm tired of people saying that it is low- income housing. It is going to ruin our lives. It is going to turn over the world. Your own studies confirm that is not the case. So, you get tired after a while. Forgive me. I don't like to do that. Barry Knight: Mr. Horsley has a question for you. RJ. Nutter: Yes sir. Thank you Mr. Knight. Donald Horsley: Didn't I understand you to say something about improvements to the intersections? Item #15 South Independence Acquisition, L.L.C. Page 17 RJ. Nutter: Yes sir. Donald Horsley: It has been reiterated that there is no help to the traffic. R.J. Nutter: Exactly. Well, what staff was saying there is that if by-right activity were to occur, there would be no basis for the improvements to the right-of-ways or the improvements that the client or developer, in this case, was making. So, what we get is, and what he is saying there, is that we're making a million dollars worth of improvements-right-of-way improvements to the intersections, Lynnhaven Parkway, which again, all the way down the street from our site. Also, further down on South Independence, toward Salem. Those are improvements that we're making, and your staff has looked at, and said, "you know what, these improvements are right. They will make a difference. " Donald Horsley: Just give a couple of example of what type of improvements they are. R.J. Nutter: First of all, in the case of Lynnhaven Parkway and Princess Anne Road is - our traffic engineer here. Here could give you more specific explanation. But the additional improvements is that they ar~ doing a two left-turn movement there, which is going to increase the capacity of that facility. That is going to cost us, I believe, $350,000 just at that one location. The other improvements are the turn lanes into the property. All the stoplights will be made into our properties. All of those things by-right. We don't have to do any of those things. Also, by-right, we don't have to proffer what this looks like. We don't have to tell you how many units or where they're going to be. We don't tell you how they're going to be. What the quality ofthe development is. We don't have to provide any workforce housing whatsoever. So, there is a lot more to this. That is why I said that traffic is indicator. Traffic is an issue. It is in every application. But to make it the "be all and end all" of the application would be the worse mistake in my life. Even though staff, quite frankly, tells you that traffic is fine. I hope that helps. The traffic engineer is here if you want a little bit more detail about road improvements? Barry Knight: Do you have any other questions at this time Mr. Horsley? Donald Horsley: No. Barry Knight: Does anyone else have anything for Mr. Nutter? Mr. Bernas? Jay Bernas: I have a question for your traffic engineer. R.J. Nutter: Yes. Please. Thank you for asking him. Barry Knight: Welcome sir. Please identify yourself for the record. Brian Goodloe: Yes. My name is Brian Goodloe. Item #15 South Independence Acquisition, L.L.c. Page 18 Jay Bernas: I got a question on the traffic study. Mr. Nutter mentioned a few times ofthe conservative factors that you used when preparing the study. Prom an order of magnitude standpoint, and I don't know if you could speak on the softer cup, that you used actual factors based on what you are actually proposing to do with the proposed commercial uses and things like that. Would the traffic counts be further reduced, and what is proposed? Brian Goodloe: Yes. Let me address one of the things. First of all, we have a little over 20,000 vehicles a day with the 1,080 units that they were talking about. I think it was 20,750. That has been reduced down to 19,000 and something with the reduction. One thing that seems to be sort of missing in this thing, it is almost 4,100 vehicles per day, and out of that, 19,000 that is already on the street. In other words, what you have is for instance, if you're going home, do you stop by the bank or do you stop by a grocery store, or do you stop by a restaurant or in the morning when you're going to work, do you get a sandwich and a cup of coffee or something? These are trips that are already built into with the traffic, it is already on the road. So, the new traffic that you are going to have with the residential is like 15,000 vehicles per day. So, it is quite a bit less then what is being talked about here today. The other thing your looking at is, we agreed with the staff and so forth because they looked at this whole area, and you have a lot of other places. I might add that my client did not, L.M. Sandler did not, look at putting a grocery store in here to begin with. They were not looking to put a bank in when we sat down. These are uses internally like from your home to within the commercial area that would increase those percentages. In other words, you would have a much higher percentage of traffic that would use those uses and would not go out on the street. I mean that is one of the purposes of mixed-use developments. So, that would be an significant reduction there. Also, we included in Princess Anne Road. Princess Anne Road has not grown with the traffic counts that are taken. You have counts there that are taken on a regular basis by the City or by the State. That has not grown since the year 2000, I think. In other words, they are the same year round, but you might get some fluctuation, but there has been no growth there. Now there are things that are planned; so, we factored in growth percentages on things that would take care of things down the road that are not there right now. Those things would be there, and, the other things that you have and one of the other things that we did not include. We took and figured in all of the commercial traffic that is coming from the outside of the area. In other words, for instance, if you took the intersection of Princess Anne and well beyond this project, or Lynnhaven or Independence, we figured that everything coming in from far out. In other words, one of the things that you do have is that you have a lot of commercial activity in this area like Target, Home Depot, Wal-Mart a lot of other activities. In other words, that is a real pedigree. Restaurants are another one. What you will, and you will pick up quite a few trips of where people just don't go when they go shopping. They don't tend just to go for one purpose. In other words, you will make your shopping list, and you will go to the hardware store. You'll go to the grocery store. You'll go to the cleaners. You will go to several different things. We did not factor in any of that. What we did was to figure that was coming in from outside the area. Probably what that would wind up Mr. Bernas, is Item #15 South Independence Acquisition, L.L.C. Page 19 probably somewhere around 15 to 20 percent of the commercial traffic would be in that factor. Now we have to model that to show it. So, that is the kind of thing. I don't think you're going to see the level of volumes that we have shown in here. I've been doing this for many years as you can tell. I would be in the age-restricted group. I've been in the engineering field since 1961. Some of my projects have been like Kingsmill on the James, Cypress Point right here in Virginai Beach. We actually go back and look at some of these. Kingsmill on the James, you know, with the golf courses, and the corporate center, and all of that. Those did not develop anywhere close to the numbers we were projecting. Jay Bernas: I guess my point is comparing and not looking at it from a conservative standpoint and looking at more of an actual standpoint. What are we really looking at? I really appreciate the conservatism that was added in the traffic impact study, but in order of magnitude, you got the residents saying that they rather see an 11 percent reduction in traffic. I mean, if we use less conservative factors based on actual trip generations, would we achieve that just based from using actual factors? Brian Goodloe: I think we're probably about 10 percent. Also, keep in mind, one of the things. 1 will tell you and the other folks here that the actual reduction in the housing here does not make a significant impact. It is going to come out of the commercial area and so forth, if you want a significant reduction in traffic. I mean, you will get a little bit. For instance, the reduction support they made, like at the intersection of Independence and Princess Anne, I mean Independence and Lynnhaven, which is a problem today. This is one that is being developed to actually make things better. That one, with the reduction, only reduces it only a delay of little over a second. You get a little bit with this, but you're not going to get a big push. In other words, if you reduce down all the development, and I've looked at it, you're looking at probably, in other words, if you went to 800 units, and then it's a matter of single-family or multi-family, if you did the mix like they're doing, you're probably only looking at somewhere at 2 or 3 seconds. Jay Bernas: So, you're saying that you're getting more bang for the buck by reducing the commercial square footage? Brian Goodloe: That is because all you have to do is look at the impacts and what numbers are being generated, and those are laid down for you. Barry Knight: Are there any other questions for Mr. Goodloe? Brian Goodloe: Thank you. Barry Knight: Are there any questions for Mr. Nutter? Mr. Bernas, you have a perplexed look on your face. Item #15 South Independence Acquisition, L.L.c. Page 20 Jay Bernas: I don't know if it is more appropriate to ask staff the question or Mr. Nutter about the right-in? Barry Knight: It is absolutely your prerogative. RJ. Nutter: I think we've given you our position. I'll be happy to respond to anything else. I am trying to let you know that it is intended by us to, quite frankly, to reduce impacts on your intersection. We're pretty positive that it will. We recognize there is a policy, and sooner or later, you have to ask the question, does the policy work in every instance? It may, but our intent here is only to represent reduction on the impact on the intersection. Pure and simple. That is why we eliminated the right-out. The right-out would have had an impact on the intersection. Jay Bernas: One question that I have, and I guess the gentleman from Empower Hampton Roads, he is using a 17 percent, I guess for the workforce housing. And, I was wondering, are you dead set on the 62 units, or is there a possibility to keep that at 81 as originally proposed? R.J. Nutter: We have to have that part to stay alive. We tried to make that clear. I appreciate Mr. McCarthy and Andy Friedman, who is not here today. We also went to Andy to make sure Andy was okay with the reduction, and he was. This is a complex formula. There are a lot of moving parts. There is a lot to happen to make it work, because we are putting in something that doesn't exist here. We're taking some risks with some real high quality stuff. We're putting in off-site infrastructure and we're conditioning all of that. So, it has to come from somewhere. We thought this combination use, and we wanted to make sure that workforce was part and a big part of this application. So, you can move any number would' be the honest answer Mr. Bernas. The problem is that no matter what number you pick, somebody is going to want something. And, this is an honest effort to try to make sure that we took an effort to try and reduce density, to reduce traffic impact as well. The new proposal for access to Princess Anne, but still maintain workforce housing but at a reduced level because of the impact on the development. But thank you for the opportunity. I am sure staff will answer it. Weare just trying to reduce traffic. That is all. Barry Knight: Are there any other questions for Mr. Nutter? Mr. Livas? Henry Livas: I would like staff to respond on reducing the traffic for they think the two way can get it back. Barry Knight: Ric? Would you come forward please? Welcome Ric. Please identify yourself for the record. Ric Lowman: My name is Ric Lowman. I'm a traffic engineer for the City of Virginia Beach, Public Works Traffic Engineering. Item #15 South Independence Acquisition, L.L.c. Page 21 Barry Knight: Mr. Livas has a question or Mr. Bernas. Ric Lowman: Okay. Henry Livas: Well, you heard the explanation that they want the right-in because it is going to help us at the intersection. They said the primary reason, and I want your response. Do you think that it is true that we're changing our policy and procedures just because it is a policy at the expense of allowing something that is going to help us? Ric Lowman: The policy is there to protect the entire corridor. And again, this is not just a single site driven issue. It has to do with the Home Depot site, with the Landstown High School site, with the Princess One Shopping Center site, and with all the future sites to come along Princess Anne Road for development or redevelopment. And, access control, while they're may be benefits to the intersection, and I say may be because what the traffic engineer analyzed was actually without the right-in. So, he analyzed what, I guess we consider worse case scenario and that intersection still works. The right turns don't, generally, don't have a great impact on your signal operations because they get to go more than say a left turning vehicle or a through vehicle. They get to go right-on-red, and they go when the through vehicle is going. So, there is going to be an impact at the intersection, but there is going to be more impact to the system. Princess Anne Road in general. The way it is designed. It is a four-lane road in each direction. It is mean to carry a heavy volume of traffic. It is a main arterial for the city. And, as we add access points to that road, you introduce two things. You introduce safety impacts to vehicles leaving the highway at unsignalized at non-street intersections, and it also impacts, you know, the capacity, as these cars have to slow down behind the cars that leave the road at these individual sites. So, to maintain the capacity of Princess Anne Road, in general, that is why Council presented the resolution to maintain Princess Anne Road as a controlled access. So, Public Works, as you heard from my Director this morning, Public Works position is to maintain that policy. Again, not just for the site, but for the entire corridor of Princess Anne Road, because there are impacts to the corridor if you start to introduce access points along the road. Henry Livas: Thank you. Barry Knight: Mr. Bernas? Jay Bernas: I have a question, and it is the same question that I asked the developer's traffic engineer. I know you're familiar with all this. I know you used to do it when you were on the consulting side. So, you understand the impact of some of the factors that you used in your assumptions. And, I guess what I am concerned about is the results of being too conservative just may not display an accurate picture. And, I understand the need to be conservative. But I am wondering if we were to use less conservative factors, would it reduce the traffic levels like in a order magnitude of 5,000 trips per day? If you Item #15 South Independence Acquisition, L.L.C. Page 22 went from a 3 percent to a 10 or 15 percent factor or any of the other factors that you used to be really conservative? Ric Lowman: I have the utmost respect for Mr. Goodloe. We've worked together on this traffic study and other traffic studies in the city. Like I said, I have a lot of respect for the work that he does. And, we did sit down, and we did talk about this factor specifically. But, one of the things that we saw is that with the option that this community would have, this new residential community. That is what is really driving the mixed-use is the residential community interacting with the commercial. With that in mind, they have so many other options in this area. And, it was our opinion that yes, there may be 11 to 12 to 13 percent mixed-use, meaning that the day-to-day trips that people have to drive in non-mixed used communities. They do have to drive a long distance maybe to get to some of these things they have to do everyday like the grocery store and the bank and to shop for retail. But, in this case, they have so many other opportunities. If you take a look at the 11 or 12 percent, it is very easy to say, true internal to this new retail is going to be 3 percent but internal is considered the community around it. I don't consider the Wal- Mart to be a very long trip for this community. We didn't consider the Target to be a very long trip for the community. The Princess One Shop offers some things that obviously might be considered internal. The Target shopping center, and the shopping center across the street from the Food Lion, and we took at look at what we considered to be internal, and, some people may consider it to be conservative, but again, we got to approve this. It is just something that made us feel better about the study. And again, we're very comfortable about the study that Mr. Goodloe put together for Sandler. Jay Bernas: I guess what I was fishing for was there another way to skin the cat as far as to get to the 11 percent? Ric Lowman: I would want to speculate on that. Jay Bernas: Yeah. I know of world magnitude would even be feasible. Ric Lowman: Right. Jay Bernas: So. Barry Knight: Are there any other questions? Ms. Anderson? Janice Anderson: So to sum it all up, you are satisfied with their study and their review that is acceptable to you regarding what the improvements they're putting in, and their traffic study? It won't be a huge delay? Ric Lowman: If it meets all the requirements of the City's traffic impact guidelines. Janice Anderson: Okay. Item #15 South Independence Acquisition, L.L.C. Page 23 Ric Lowman: Some other statements that were in there were meant to give you an understanding of the impacts. Again, we don't approve the actual development and zoning. We made sure that they have done what they need to do by City Code and by Public Work Standards. In our opinion, they have done that with the off-site improvements. It was a little misleading, because some of the improvements that they're doing, they have to or would do by-right or not. Like the traffic signal? If they warranted a traffic signal with the housing, they would have to build the signal. The turn lanes, they would have to build. The off-site improvements are the ones they are doing at Lynnhaven and Independence, where they are adding a left turn lane, and they're also extending another left turn lane. So, we could not require them to do those improvements, but everything else we could require them to do if they warranted it. Janice Anderson: Okay. So, you stand by the City's policy with the closed access? Ric Lowman: Absolutely. Janice Anderson: If you add this right-turn or other right-turns, that actually bogs down the system? Ric Lowman: Yes it does. By a basis of not really having a hardship to allow the right- turn in, and again, and I hate to say this, but it is going to break. the policy, and it would set an incredible precedent that not only is new development going to use, but existing developments can come back and use as well. That would result in a decreased capacity on Princess Anne Road, in Public Works' opinion. Again, I agree with the directors. Barry Knight: Are there any other questions? Thank you Ric. Ric Lowman: Thank you. Barry Knight: Okay. We'll close the public hearing portion of it and open it for discussion amongst the Commission members. Ms. Katsias? Kathy Katsias: Well, I think this development, Renaissance Park, is a wonderful, wonderful development. We've been looking for mixed-use development like this, and we're fortunate to have such a diverse housing, including single-family, hotel. I think Mr. Crabtree said it last month with the Sentara system down the road. It affords us the opportunity to house the people that come and use the hospital. My only concern is with the controlled access on Princess Anne Road. That right-turn lane bothers me. And, if that could be eliminated, I would be favor of this application. Barry Knight: Thank you Ms. Katsias. Is there any other discussion? Mr. Crabtree? Eugene Crabtree: Well, as I said last month, and I'll say it again. I'm like Kathy. I like this application. I think it does what we want it to do in mixed-use in all aspects. We got Item #15 South Independence Acquisition, L.L.C. Page 24 a variety of things in this area, both commercial and residential. I will go on record once again, and as Mr. Nutter knows, that the one thing that I would like to see added, I would like to see an assisted living unit put in there for assisted living for elderly since it is close to medical facilities in the area, as so much other inner structure there. I agree with Ms. Katsias on the fact with the right-turn in. I think due to everything we've heard today from all the engineers, and the rules and regulations whatever, I think that should be eliminated. So, I'm all for it; for the elimination of the right-turn. Barry Knight: Is there any other discussion? The Chair will entertain a motion. Mr. Horsley or discussion? Either one. Donald Horsley: I'll get some discussion in, and we might end up with a motion. I will kind of reiterate my comments from last month also. We've ridden by this property for many, many years wondering what was going to happen to it. This beautiful open field that has been farmed for years and years. Little bits and pieces have been carved away from it. But, we are very fortunate that this whole large track has stayed intact enough that it can be developed as one parcel. And, this is something that we very rarely see. A parcel as large as this in the city to developed. And, I think it is going to be a great amenity to that area of the city. And, when you get these advantages, sometimes you get a few disadvantages also, but I see it as a big plus for the city. I see it in an area that an area can handle the traffic. I think the road system in this area can handle it, and we have been told that from time and time again by our experts in that field. So, call it what you may. I'm very impressed, and I think it is going to be a good thing for the city. With that, I'll be prepared to make a motion that we approve the application with the exemption of the right -turn lane off of Princess Anne Road. Barry Knight: Mr. Macali? Bill Macali: Yes sir. Barry Knight: On page 15, there is a proffer number 30. Bill Macali: All you really need to do Mr. Chairman is just to make it clear that your recommendation is subject to the deletion of the right-turn in. The applicant can either chose to go forward with the application as is, which would be contrary to recommendation, or he can make the technical modifications to the proffers, which would conform with the Planning Commission's recommendation. Barry Knight: Thank you. Bill Macali: But, you don't really need to specify exactly what proffers need to be deleted. Barry Knight: Thank you. There is a motion on the table. Ms. Katsias, do you second it? Item #15 South Independence Acquisition, L.L.c. Page 25 There is a motion to approve by Don Horsley and seconded by Kathy Katsias, with the removal of the right-turn lane. I'll open it up for discussion. I'll call for the question. AYE 8 NAY 0 ABSO ANDERSON AYE BERNAS AYE CRABTREE AYE HENLEY HORSLEY AYE KA TSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE LIVAS AYE REDMOND STRANGE AYE WOOD ABSENT 3 ABSENT ABSENT ABSENT Ed Weeden: By a vote of 8-0, the Board has approved the application South Independence Acquisition, L.L.c., with the removal of the right-turn lane. Barry Knight: Is there anything else Mr. Secretary? Joseph Strange: That concludes our agenda. Barry Knight: The meeting is adjourned. I J 3 Lf 5 V 7 9 to { I r1 r; IW rS ''0 17 10 1q ~u c::=-. ~ \$ $, \tJOeO~~ ~~\.~ In\)k} 1 l,.LC; ~tlll()i (-) <II 0 h n - t, i... ;PPOSltlOp to t_e SOUhl Independence Acquisitlon By signing V\!e agree to oppose the proposed development. Name Address liJ;,,'^bll~ e/~ '-II f/>~ {J..fA.:...6o I:) iJr. c/P/C-- (!<'... ".. bu"'-"'.P~. If I;L ~ p-/;UgeuJ };i t-/ l-&.e ~A-i ~ row ~. 58 <; c ~ h;;('k;~ 5--1-(;( r ,!/(: .t.!133 ~(i) DI'. i ~/37 I~~~t__ Y I <<-t 0 e C\. .. V\ kJo \.J b r .~ (~\ (Z I\. ~ /\ \0 Ov..) Or- tJ;1r~6 ~1t;3)V DY '0 l1r 5"1 ~Ql ~ t?c.x 0--P-c-'---.---- God bless America and all of it's people t L~ 5. UvQ~~ A~vl~t'notJ, t..--L..-(., L.{(U(~1 Opposition to the South Independence Acquisition By signing we agree to oppose the proposed development. i""lj dilit hliUi t;:;;:, l /-':('j, \ I.. " I") TGft ( k~~ l tto4' \<..v', ^ bO'tV Lt- ~uu A-JNbow Dk ll- ! ,~.. '-;\' -L.---- I t'jJ Kft,--.,vjJ:oJu ~ C!..-I ' fIA~/ ~ /!fr~ J God bkss America ami ail of it's people CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE In Reply Refer To Our File No. DF-6628 DATE: May 9, 2007 FROM: Leslie L. Lilley "0 B. Kay Wilson ~ DEPT: City Attorney DEPT: City Attorney TO: RE: Conditional Zoning Application: South Independence Acquisitions, LLC The above-referenced conditional zoning application is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on May 22, 2007. I have reviewed the subject proffer agreement, dated December 1, 2006 and have determined it to be legally sufficient and in proper legal form. A copy of the agreement is attached. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter further. BKW/als Enclosure cc: Kathleen Hassen Prepared By: Troutman Sanders LLP 222 Central Park Avenue, Suite 2000 Virginia Beach, VA 23462 AGREEMENT TillS AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is made as of this 1 st day of December, 2006, by and among SPENCE FAMILY FARM, L.P., a Virginia limited partnership ("Spence Farm"), the current owner of that certain property located in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, which property is more particularly described as Parcel One in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference ("Parcel One"); WILLIAM L. SPENCE. In ("William Spence"), the current owner of that certain property located in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, which property is more particularly described as Parcel Two in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference ("Parcel Two" and, collectively with Parcel One, the "Property"); and SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION, L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company ("South Independence" and, collectively with Spence Farm and William Spence, the "Grantor"), the contract purchaser of the Property; and the CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia (hereinafter referred to as the "Grantee"). WIT N E SSE T H: WHEREAS, the Grantor has initiated an amendment to the Zoning Map of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, by petition addressed to the Grantee, so as to change the classification of the Property from R-5D (Residential Duplex District) to Conditional A-12 (Apartment District) with a PD-H2 (Planned Unit Development District) overlay (2:. 84.4 acres), Conditional B-4 (Mixed Use District) (2:. 26.3 acres) and Conditional A-36 (Apartment District) 0: 23.1 acres); and WHEREAS, the Grantee's policy is to provide only for the orderly development of land for various purposes, including mixed-use purposes, through zoning and other land development legislation; and GPINs: 1475-85-6017-0000, 1485-05-0352-0000 and 1485-25-1012-0000 WHEREAS, the Grantor acknowledges that competing and sometimes incompatible uses conflict, and that in order to permit differing uses on and in the area of the subject Property and at the same time to recognize the effects of change and the need for various types of uses, certain reasonable conditions governing the use of the Property for the protection of the community that are not generally applicable to land similarly zoned Conditional A-12 with a PD-H2 overlay, Conditional B-4 and Conditional A-36 are needed to cope with the situation to which the Grantor's rezoning application gives rise; and WHEREAS, the Grantor has voluntarily proffered in writing in advance of and prior to the public hearing before the Grantee, as part of the proposed conditional amendment to the Zoning Map, in addition to the regulations provided for in the existing A-12, PD-H2, B-4 and A-36 zoning districts by the existing City's Zoning Ordinance (CZO), the following reasonable conditions related to the physical development, operation and use of the Property to be adopted as a part of said amendment to the new Zoning Map relative to the Property, all of which have a reasonable relation to the rezoning and the need for which is generated by the rezoning; and WHEREAS, said conditions having been proffered by the Grantor and allowed and accepted by the Grantee as part of the amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, such conditions shall continue in full force and effect until a subsequent amendment changes the zoning on the Property covered by such conditions; provided, however, that such conditions shall continue despite a subsequent amendment if the subsequent amendment is part of the comprehensive implementation of a new or substantially revised zoning ordinance, unless, notwithstanding the foregoing, these conditions are amended or varied by written instrument recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia and executed by the record owner of the subject Property at the time of recordation of such instrument; provided, further, that said instrument is consented to by the Grantee in writing as evidenced by a certified copy of the ordinance or resolution adopted by the governing body of the Grantee, after a public hearing before the Grantee advertised pursuant to the provisions of the Code of Virginia, Section 15.2-2204, which said ordinance or resolution shall be recorded along with said instrument as conclusive evidence of such consent. 2 NOW THEREFORE, the Grantor, for itself, its successors, assigns, grantees, and other successors in title or interest, voluntarily and without any requirement by or exaction from the Grantee or its governing body and without any element of compulsion of quid pro QUO for zoning, rezoning, site plan, building permit or subdivision approval, hereby makes the following declaration of conditions and restrictions which shall restrict and govern the physical development, operation and use of the Property and hereby covenants and agrees that these proffers (collectively, the "Proffers") shall constitute covenants running with the said Property, which shall be binding upon the Property and upon all parties and persons claiming under or through the Grantor, its heirs, personal representatives, assigns, grantees and other successors in interest or title, namely: 1. In order to create a sense of place featuring stormwater retention ponds as aesthetic amenities, community centers, multiple residential products along with commercial development, including a hotel, the Grantor agrees to develop the Property with the elements and character set forth on the Land Use Plan entitled, "CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN" (the "Plan"), prepared by LRK as depicted in the Renaissance Park Design Guidelines book (the "Design Guidelines"), dated November 28,2006, last revised March 23, 2007, a copy of which is on file with the Department of Planning and has been exhibited to the City Council. 2. It is recognized that the detailed building plans, as well as the site plans for the various elements within a Village, may change as the planning stage progresses. The intent of the elevations referred to throughout this Agreement is to demonstrate the architectural style and quality of the buildings represented. The intent of the site plans referred to throughout this Agreement is to identify the elements that will be developed within each Village, though the actual siting, dimensions and orientation of those elements within a Village may change as final design dictates. Final elevations and locations for all of the structures shall be submitted to the Planning Director for review and approval prior to site plan approval. 3 MULTI-FAMILY APARTMENT VILLAGE (CONDITIONAL A-36 ZONING DISTRICT) 3. The village depicted on the Plan as "Multi-Family Apartment Village" shall be developed as a multiple family residential apartment community. The residential dwellings facing Princess Anne Road and South Independence Boulevard shall be developed with architectural features that are similar to those depicted on the architectural elevation entitled "MULTI-FAMILY APARTMENTS STREET FRONTAGE ELEVATION", as shown in the Design Guidelines. The architectural features are to include brick veneer on the low level, picket railings on the balconies, horizontal lapped siding, and roofs with a 5 in 12 minimum slope. Any four-story portions of the buildings are to be at least 100' from the adjoining residential property. The interior residential dwellings shall be developed with architectural features that are similar to those depicted on the architectural elevation entitled "MULTI-FAMILY APARTMENTS FRONT ELEVATION - INTERIOR BUILDING", as shown in the Design Guidelines. Parking for the residential apartment community may include detached and/or attached garages, m addition to surface parking. 4. The Multi-Family Apartment Village shall include a community center with an exercise facility, a pool, a business office and surrounding open space. The community center building shall be developed with architectural features that are similar to those depicted on the architectural elevation entitled "MUL TI-F AMIL Y AP AR TMENTS CLUBHOUSE ELEVATION", as shown in the Design Guidelines. 5. The total number of multi-family apartments to be developed on the Property zoned Conditional A-36 shall not exceed 400 units. 6. At the time each section or phase of the Multi-Family Apartment Village is developed, Grantor shall install a combination of landscaping and berming along Princess Anne Road and South Independence Boulevard. 4 RESIDENTIAL VILLAGE (CONDITIONAL A-12 WITH A PD-H2 OVERLAY) 7. The village depicted on the Plan as "Residential Village" shall be developed with a mix of residential products in a condominium regime with architectural features that are similar to those depicted on the architectural elevations entitled as "TWIN TOWNHOMES FRONT ELEVATION", "TWIN TOWNHOMES SIDE ELEVATIONS", "SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED ELEVATION", and "SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOME ELEVATIONS", as shown in the Design Guidelines. 8. The Residential Village shall include a community center with an exercise facility, a pool and surrounding open space. The community center building shall be developed with architectural features that are similar to those depicted on the architectural elevation entitled "RESIDENTIAL CLUBHOUSE ELEVATION", as shown in the Design Guidelines. 9. The total combination of single-family detached, single-family attached and twin townhouses to be developed on the Property zoned Conditional A-12 with a PD-H2 overlay shall not exceed 680 units. 10. Grantor shall record a declaration of protective covenants, conditions and restrictions (the "Restrictions") governing all of the Property zoned Conditional A-12 with a PD- H2 overlay, which shall be administered and enforced by a mandatory homeowners association which will be responsible for maintaining all common areas including, but not limited to, the clubhouse, pool, open space areas, landscape buffers and stormwater retention ponds located within the Residential Village. 11. Grantor shall restrict at least one hundred (100) dwelling units within the Property for occupation, on a full time basis, by at least one adult resident of fifty-five (55) years of age or older. Such restriction shall also prohibit persons under twenty (20) years of age from residing in such units for more than one hundred and twenty (120) days in any calendar year. The age restrictions shall be contained in a Declaration of Restrictions recorded against the restricted units and shall be administered and enforced by the homeowners association. In the event the 5 approved site planes) for the Property provide for less than 1080 dwelling units, Grantor shall be entitled to reduce the number of age-restricted units it reserves by a number equal to the difference between 1080 units and the number of dwelling units permitted to be constructed in accordance with the approved site planes). 12. With respect to the areas shown on the Plan within the Residential Village as "Open Space" (the "Open Space Area"), Grantor shall file and obtain approval of a rezoning petition to rezone the Open Space Area to P-l (Preservation District), as defined in the CZO, prior to the date the first building permit in the Residential Village is issued. Such Open Space Area shall be subject to recorded restrictive covenants which prohibit the use of such areas for any purpose other than recreation and open space use. 13. Grantor shall provide for maintenance of the Open Space Area by the homeowners association, in which case all property owners within the Residential Village shall be responsible for the costs and expenses of such maintenance. 14. When developed, all single-family detached, single-family attached and twin townhouses within the Residential Village shall meet or exceed the setbacks and lot dimensions set forth on the page entitled "Design Criteria" in the Design Guidelines. 15. Grantor shall ensure that the addresses for units within the Residential Village that are located on alleys will have addresses located on the rear of the structure. 16. Grantor shall provide street trees along the streets within the Residential Village. In addition, Grantor shall provide ornamental trees throughout the Residential Village in those areas where space and conditions permit. The street trees will be selected from the City's list of recommended street trees and spaced accordingly. 17. At the time each section or phase of the Residential Village is developed, Grantor shall install a combination of landscaping and berming along South Independence Boulevard, Salem Road and Lynnhaven Parkway. 6 18. Grantor shall reserve sixty-two (62) dwelling units for work force housing (as set forth below). Grantor shall work with the Directors of Planning and Housing and Neighborhood Preservation to ensure the implementation of a program that reserves such homes for sale to credit-worthy buyers having incomes between 80% and 120% of area median household income, determined using BUD-published figures as adjusted for family size, for the year in which the home buyer is qualified to purchase. Such program shall provide: (a) that the Grantor shall distribute reserved dwelling units among credit-worthy buyers at all spectrums of the median household income range set forth above; (b) that sale of the reserved units shall result in a housing cost ratio for the qualified buyer that is acceptable to the Director of Housing; (c) for integration of those dwelling units reserved for qualified buyers throughout the townhouse and twin townhouse portions of the Residential Village (both in terms of location and in terms of time of sale); and (d) for reserved dwelling units that are physically indistinguishable on the exterior from other dwelling units of the same type and size. COMMERCIAL VILLAGE (CONDITIONAL B-4) 19. The Commercial Village depicted on the Plan shall be developed as a pedestrian friendly commercial center having retail space, office space, anchor tenants and a hotel. The Commercial Village shall be developed in the character of a "main street" retail and commercial concept, though the final siting, dimensions and orientation of the buildings, drive aisles and parking areas may differ from that reflected in the Plan depicted in the Design Guidelines. 20. The buildings within the Commercial Village on the Plan shall use multiple building articulations, and a variety of building materials, finishes and colors. The buildings shall be of a quality and of a similar architectural character as those reflected in the photographs entitled "SHOPS AND OFFICE ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER" as shown in the Design Guidelines. 7 21. Outparcel buildings, as well as the hotel, shall be developed using building designs and architectural materials substantially similar to and compatible with the designs and materials stated in proffer 20 above. 22. The Commercial Village shall voluntarily comply with the following sections of the CZO pertaining to design standards for retail establishments and shopping centers: Sections 245(a)(2), 245(a)(3), 245(a)(4), 245(b)(1), 245(c)(I), 245(c)(2), 245(c)(3), 246(d)(5), 247(c), 247(d), 247(e) and 248(a). 23. Monument signs identifying the Commercial Village shall be located along Princess Anne Road and South Independence Boulevard in the locations shown on the Plan in the Design Guidelines. 24. Signs containing movmg or scrolling text shall be prohibited within the Commercial Village. 25. The service and/or loading areas of the shops, offices and anchor buildings shown on the Plan shall be painted neutral, earth tone colors and shall be screened from the view from public rights-of-way and/or residentially zoned property as depicted on the drawings entitled "SERVICE AREA SCREENING" as shown in the Design Guidelines. 26. All dumpsters shall be enclosed on at least three sides and screened as required by the CZO. Dumpster locations shall be depicted on the final site plan. 27. All site lighting installed along any portion of a building in the Commercial Village facing an adjoining residential use and all site lighting installed in a parking area adjoining a residential use shall be directed away from the adjoining residential neighborhood and shall be downward directed and shielded to minimize light seepage into the adjoining residential neighborhood. 28. At the time each section or phase of the Commercial Village is developed, Grantor shall install a landscaped berm, consisting of a continuous hedge row and staggered 8 trees, of at least 30' in width along Princess Anne Road and at least 15' in width along South Independence Boulevard. 29. The Grantor shall construct a pedestrian connection to provide pedestrian access between the hotel and the ''main street" feature of the Commercial Village. 30. One right in only turn lane from Princess Anne Road into the Commercial Village shall be permitted. Such turn lane shall be constructed in accordance with City standards. 31. Grantor shall comply with the recommendations for roadway improvements listed as Recommendations 1 through 7 in Chapter 7 of the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by Bryant B. Goodloe, P.C., last revised February 26, 2007, a copy of which is on file with the Department of Public Wodes, Traffic Engineering Division. 32. Further conditions lawfully imposed by applicable development ordinances may be required by the Grantee during detailed site plan and/or subdivision review and administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements. All references hereinabove to zoning districts and to regulations applicable thereto, refer to the CZO of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in force as of the date the conditional zoning amendment is approved by the Grantee. The Grantor covenants and agrees that (1) the Zoning Administrator of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia shall be vested with all necessary authority on behalf of the governing body of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia to administer and enforce the foregoing conditions, including (i) the ordering in writing of the remedying of any noncompliance with such conditions, and (ii) the bringing of legal action or suit to ensure compliance with such conditions, including mandatory or prohibitory injunction, abatement, damages or other appropriate action, suit or proceedings; (2) the failure to meet all conditions shall constitute cause to deny the issuance of any of the required building or occupancy permits as may be appropriate; (3) if aggrieved by any decision of the Zoning Administrator made pursuant to the provisions of the City Code, the cZO or this Agreement, the Grantor shall petition the governing body for the 9 review thereof prior to instituting proceedings in court; and (4) the Zoning Map shall show by an appropriate symbol on the map the existence of conditions attaching to the zoning of the subject Property on the map and that the ordinance and the conditions may be made readily available and accessible for public inspection in the office of the Zoning Administrator and in the Department of Planning and that they shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia and indexed in the name of the Grantor and Grantee. Upon acquisition of the Property by South Independence, South Independence shall succeed to all rights and obligations of the "Grantor" under this Agreement, and Spence Farm and William Spence shall have no further rights or obligations of a "Grantor" under this Agreement. This Agreement may be signed in one or more counterparts, which, upon execution by all the parties, shall constitute a single agreement. 10 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned Grantor executes this Agreement as of the date first written above. GRANTOR: SPENCE FAMILY FARM, L.P., a Virginia limited partnership BY:--W~~~~ Wlliam L. Spence, III, General Partner STATE OFi)~~CL- CITY/COUNTY O~~~o-wit: The foregoing instrument was sworn to and acknowledged before me thi~ day of ~ 2007, by William L. Spence, ill, in his capacity as General Partner of Spence Family , L.P., a Virginia limited partnership, on behalf of the partnership. <::::::----=--. =, .__..._..._~ U~ ;. 0{W~ blic \ Notary My Commission EXPirD~ ~ I eodi' 11 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned Grantor executes this Agreement as of the date first written above. GRANTOR: ~. A.~ 11f William L. Spence, III STATEOF\)~.:.u:tL ~ CITY/COUNT i0~~ , to-wit: f\. Q. !h~ foregoing instrument was sworn to and acknowledged before me thi~ day of ~~ ' 2007, by William L. Spence, ill, who is personally known to me or has produced as identification. =::.:......._ L~".~ tMJU- Notary Pu lic My Commission E~ ~ I zeoq \ 12 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned Grantor executes this Agreement as of the date first written above. GRANTOR: SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION, L.L.c., a Virginia limited liability company .....z:--- Nathan D. Benson, Manager COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to-wit: The foregoing instrument was sworn to and acknowledged before me this) Is t day of e...'o" < 2007, by Nathan D. Benson, in his capacity as Manager of South Independence Acquisition, .L.C., a Virginia limited liability company, on behalf of the company. ~fu!:/~4 My Commission Expires: 07- 3/-1 G 327985.4 13 EXHIBIT A Le2:al Description PARCEL ONE: ALL THAT certain tract or parcel of land, located in the City of Virginia Beach, (formerly the County of Princess Anne, in the Kempsville District) in the State of Virginia, of which John C. Spence died seized and possessed, consisting of one hundred thirty-three (133) acres, more or less, but by survey of October 1909, contains 210.7 acres and bounded as follows: On the North by the lands of T. J. Kiff; on the East by the lands of Griffin Hewitt, deceased; on the South by the lands of John R. Fentress; and on the West by the North Landing Road. LESS, SAVE AND EXCEPT, however, the following parcels: (i) that certain parcel of land comprised of 3.15 acres, more or less, taken by the Commonwealth of Virginia by instrument recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Deed Book 154 at page 471; (ii) that certain parcel of land comprised of .79 acres, more or less, conveyed to Luther Foxwell, et ux, by instrument recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Deed Book 248 at page 466; (iii) that certain parcel of land comprised of 64.848 acres, more or less, conveyed to W & F Investment Corporation by instrument recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Deed Book 732 at page 592; (iv) that certain parcel of land comprised of 1.035 acres, more or less, conveyed to William L. Spence, Jr. by instrument recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Deed Book 1196 at page 718; (v) that certain parcel of land comprised of 1.609 acres, more or less, taken by the City of Virginia Beach by instrument recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Deed Book 2823 at page 1318; (vi) that certain parcel of land comprised of 2.502 acres, more or less, taken by the Commonwealth Transportation Commission by instrument recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Deed Book 2867 at page 754; (vii) that certain parcel ofland comprised of3.98 acres, more or less, taken by the City of Virginia Beach by instrument recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Deed Book 2923 at page 110; (viii) that certain parcel of land comprised of .001 acres, more or less, taken by the Commonwealth Transportation Commission by instrument recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Deed Book 3163 at page 1763; (ix) that certain parcel ofland comprised of 1.797 acres, more or less, taken by the City of Virginia Beach by instrument recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Deed Book 3778 at page 589; and (x) that certain parcel of I land comprised of 1.1435 acres, more or less, conveyed to William L. Spence, III, by instrument recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, as Instrument number 200404070055145. IT BEING a portion of the same property conveyed to Spence Family Farm, L.P. by deed dated December 26, 1985 from William L. Spence and Kathleen P. Spence, husband and wife, and 14 recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Deed Book 2467 at page 2021. PARCEL TWO: ALL THAT certain lot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings and improvements thereon, and the appurtenances thereunto belonging, situate, lying and being in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and being known and designated as "PARCEL A HOMESITE: as shown on the plat entitled, "Subdivision of Property of Spence Family Farm, L.P., Virginia Beach, Virginia:, dated July 12, 2000, prepared by W. P. Large, Inc. and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia in Map Book 291 at page 72. IT BEING the same property conveyed to William L. Spence, ill, by Deed of Distribution dated March 12, 2004 from Linda Spence Widgeon, Successor Trustee under the revocable trust agreement creating THE KATHLEEN PETREE SPENCE REVOCABLE TRUST DATED OCTOBER 30, 1997, and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, as Instrument number 200404070055145. 15 CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: In the matter of closing, vacating and discontinuing a portion of that certain street known as "CONNIE LANE - V AR. WIDTH R1W" as shown on that certain plat entitled "EXHIBIT PLAT PROPOSED STREET CLOSURE OF A PORTION OF CONNIE LANE VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA". DISTRICT 4 - BA YSIDE AND DISTRICT 2 - KEMPSVILLE MEETING DATE: May 22, 2007 . Background: The applicant, Connie One, LLC, a Virginia limited liability company, requests the discontinuance, closure and abandonment of a portion of Connie Lane for its incorporation into a proposed multi-family dwelling project. The details pertaining to the multi-family development project have been submitted with a Conditional Change of Zoning application that is on the same City Council agenda as this item. . Considerations: The Viewers met and determined there will be no public inconvenience of closure, provided the applicant records the necessary easements for the City of Virginia Beach Public Utilities Department. Staff concludes closure of the right-of- way, to be incorporated into the proposed multi-family project, is acceptable with the conditions below. There was opposition to the request. . Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 10-0 to approve the request with the following conditions: 1. The City Attorney's Office will make the final determination regarding ownership of the underlying fee. The purchase price to be paid to the City shall be determined according to the "Policy Regarding Purchase of City's Interest in Streets Pursuant to Street Closures," approved by City Council. Copies of the policy are available in the Planning Department. 2. The applicant shall resubdivide the property and vacate internal lot lines to incorporate the closed area into the adjoining parcels. The plat must be submitted and approved for recordation prior to final street closure approval. Connie One, L.L.C. Page 2 of 2 3. The applicant shall provide all the required easements requested by the City of Virginia Beach Public Utilities Department. 4. The applicant shall verify that no private utilities exist within the right-of-way proposed for closure. Preliminary comments from the utility companies indicate that there are no private utilities within the right-of-way proposed for closure. If private utilities do exist, easements satisfactory to the utility company must be provided. 5. The applicant shall provide access for the single-family dwelling known as 5448 Connie Lane, located directly north of the proposed right-of-way closure. 6. Closure of the right-of-way shall be contingent upon compliance with the above stated conditions within 365 days of approval by City Council. If the conditions noted above are not accomplished and the final plat is not approved within one year of the City Council vote to close the right-of-way this approval shall be considered null and void. . Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement Planning Commission Minutes Location Map Ordinance Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends approval. City Manage . k.,~~ Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department CONNIE ONE, LLC Agenda' Item 13 April 11, 2006 Public Hearing Staff Planner: Faith Christie REQUEST: Discontinuance. closure and abandonment of a portion of Connie Lane. ADDRESS I DESCRIPTION: Property beginning on the east side of Connie Way to the west side of Baker Road. COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT: 2 - KEMPSVILLE and 4 - BAYSIDE SITE SIZE: 33,541 square feet (0,77 acre) SUMMARY OF REQUEST The applicant requests the discontinuance, closure and abandonment of a portion of Connie Lane for its incorporation into a proposed multi-family dwelling project. EXISTING LAND USE: Undeveloped right-of-way SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: South: East: West: LAND USE AND ZONING INFORMATION . Vacant parcell R-7.5 Residential . Automotive repair and junkyard 11-1 Light Industrial . Baker Road . Connie Lane and Connie Way NATURAL RESOURCE AND CULTURAL FEATURES: There are no natural resources or cultural features to speak of existing on the site. A portion of the site is partially treed with underbrush, and the balance of the site is currently being used as a bulk storage yard for CONNIE ONE / Street Closure Agenda Item 13 Page 1 the automobile repair facility. AICUZ: The site is in an AICUZ of less than 65 dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. IMPACT ON CITY SERVICES MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN (MTP) I CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP): Baker Road is a two-lane undivided minor arterial roadway that currently dead-ends just east of Connie Lane. The Baker Road Extended roadway improvements project will extend Baker Road east to Witchduck Road. The project is scheduled to be completed in the spring of 2007. There is an existing house that fronts on and has a driveway from the piece of Connie Lane at Connie Way that the applicant has applied to have vacated. The Applicant must include provisions in the right- of-way closure application to provide this property access to a public roadway. Associated with the above comment, the Applicant will be responsible for roadway modifications at the Connie Lane and Connie Way intersection so that the current 'T' intersection becomes a 90-degree roadway bend if the right-of-way closure is approved by the City of Virginia Beach. WATER: There is an 8-inch City water main on Connie Lane, and an existing 6-inch water main on Connie Way, located within the proposed street closure, which will require dedication of a 30-foot wide public utility easement centered over the waterline. In addition, an all-weather access will be required within the easement. There shall be no encroachments (structures and parking permitted) within the easement. SEWER: There is an 8-inch City sanitary sewer gravity main on Connie Way and existing 10-inch City sanitary sewer gravity main on Connie Lane, continuing through a 35-foot wide public utility easement to Aylesbury Drive. . PRIVATE UTILITIES: Preliminary comments from the utility companies indicate that there are no private utilities within the right-of-way proposed for closure. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of this request with the conditions below. EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION Evaluation: The Viewers met and determined there will be no public inconvenience if the street is closed provided the applicant records the necessary easements for the City of Virginia Beach Public Utilities Department. CONNIE ONE / Street Closure Agenda Item 13 Page 2 Staff concludes closure of the right-of-way, to be incorporated into the proposed multi-family project, is acceptable with the conditions below. CONDITIONS 1. The City Attorney's Office will make the final determination regarding ownership of the underlying fee. The purchase price to be paid to the City shall be determined according to the "Policy Regarding Purchase of City's Interest in Streets Pursuant to Street Closures," approved by City Council. Copies of the policy are available in the Planning Department. 2. The applicant shall resubdivide the property and vacate internal lot lines to incorporate the closed area into the adjoining parcels. The plat must be submitted and approved for recordation prior to final street closure approval. 3. The applicant shall provide all the required easements requested by the City of Virginia Beach Public Utilities Department. 4. The applicant shall verify that no private utilities exist within the right-of-way proposed for closure. Preliminary comments from the utility companies indicate that there are no private utilities within the right-of-way proposed for closure, If private utilities do exist, easements satisfactory to the utility company must be provided. 5. The applicant shall provide access for the single-family dwelling directly north of the proposed right-of- way closure. 6. Closure of the right-of-way shall be contingent upon compliance with the above stated conditions within 365 days of approval by City Council. If the conditions noted above are not accomplished and the final plat is not approved within one year of the City Council vote to close the right-of-way this approval shall be considered null and void. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. Plans submitted with this rezoning application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes and Standards. The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. CONNIE ONE I Street Closure Agenda Item 13 Page 3 AERIAL OF SITE LOCATION CONNIE ONE / Street Closure Agenda Item 13 Page 4 Mo~f!ft ~cole Connie One, LLC ~~o . 60 c;oJCj~ ~ ~O~ ~~~ltJ~ t:.. ......../A 'C::; %00 ~ W ~C!:;5li ~ :-II l.....J; -1. ~' ~ '1 r /It N ~ 16a/A ~ 00 /.. <' (J. " ~~ ';;f ~ "1 ~ 1/ri1)L:., ~ ~ (5,) )';1 U () 0, ,. /A!!!/';y !"-~~ ~I:.:.fI ~'];-- .. tI. ;..... ~~ ~ ~ll: l:;,llll~~ ~.....~ {} ~ $ '$) '~ ..~ I/;, & )::;'/~I ~/6: ~~ ~!~AtR o 0 0 G ~ 0 '. 0 ZfA!J~!JJa bll..r'-~" 7.5 (J () 0 Q{j ~ (> v l:!;) '!;~~ Qcu~ ~ o ~ ~-f.5? R-,].5 [;:; ~~SfP CJ~ L 0 8: ~[J li\DillcrnQ7{Dj~ 01S ~,A 1~. I OL2 (j ~ 0 ....::::::!!l.. ,.Y 1-70- - - ...J ~ "J.. ~ ~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~fi1~ ~~ a;~ r/~ WA ~ ~ r-:::.~-~ AR' ~ ~ B! pt ,,[ ~lo'. .bl~..... f ~) /J~~ 0 II hL II t:.. fi!J !l: fflI Jj ~ 1 Ill.. ' Ii. /r 'l:-l MA USTER ~ TR r: 'I - IaT.J.1 I >.~ u..I: . '-,; 2 -tlJ!l I Ill. 3 I 3 IU fill t!: / R -7.5 fJI~'!tJ. . 1 (~~~A ~ III "b~-?, [ Street Closure 1. 10/11/66 Rezoning (R-S 4 Residence Suburban to M-I 3 General Industrial) Approved Conditional Use Permit (Bulk Storage / Contractor Storage Yard) 5/21/79 Denied 2. 9/22/92 Reconsideration of Conditions (Subdivision Variance) Approved 12/18/90 Subdivision Variance Approved 3. 9/28/99 Street Closure Approved 2/9/99 Rezoning (R-7.5 Residential to A-12 Apartment with a PD-H2 Planned Approved Unit Overlay) 4, 1/26/99 Rezoning (R-7.5 Residential and A-12 Apartment to Conditional A-12 Approved Apartment) 6/2/92 Conditional Use Permit (Recreational Facility) Denied 5. 5/8/01 Conditional Use Permit (Church) Denied 10/23/90 Conditional Use Permit (Church) Denied ZONING HISTORY CONNIE ONE I Street Closure Agenda Item 13 Page 6 NOILV3I'lddV :nIilSO'l3 L3::nILSww , ~ ~ ~l .~ i~ --,: ~II ~ .::: :: .~ " ~ ,E it~ ~ i ~I it ~ ~ .~~E! :r.. ~ g -;t....~ i_.~_.: ~_-=' -.;:;:-:~__' _~ _I ' ::"-- ~.~~; -: :. .. gl 'EI -, -_~ ~_ -E .=_E :1. ~ ;;> ~,3i ~: -... :1--'~ .€!, ~ ~ '.E_!: ,__~, :=:1 =, - o -=~,~~!~ E ~ - ~ -~ 81 ~ = ~:; ~, "'1 ~ Hi ;_:,.,1 ~.~:. ~ f~ .~ 8 ~~ i:~: ~.=I ~-- -~.~ ~ ;/;c:~:,- ..----:: ::. -. . ,_:::_'.,' .;"c :j ~ :: f':: ~ ~ } ~ ~.j \~, J - z ;..; ::; ;..; ~ :n ;..; =: ;;l ::I.: "" .. ..J W '::I.: Q E- Z ~ ::; ;..; E- ~ ?r. ~ f = .~ r" ~ ~ ;..; ::z:: ;;l ::I.: "" ~ - W .- ~. - Q ~ ~ - == - ~.~ ...,,, ;r..::; c _ :: ~ ~.' ~'-~ ~~ ,. ~ :'!..~ -:.0:_ ~~ ~.g] ~ lfi ~ ~ r, 'J ~~ ~ ~ E ~i -' ~i ~; .~. " . ~ i ~ ~i :....! " ~f llf Hi ~-E& ~~1 WI .=~C: .=1 . N -.. . M - ;..1 " ::l ~I -, 3; :::: .:, ..., -.. '// ~ " ~'- -g a~~ ~ i> ~.r~ .~~ ~ ~~..5 i'1! " - 1!i .~.,..- ~.s ~ ~ ~ ~ E.~~ ~ ~ " ~- !. 'r, ~~~ c. ~ rr. ~~~ .: >." ~] ~ = ;:c: ~ ~'= f 'J ~':J .~ "": ,-, ~ ~ .~ .E t ~ .j ... Q ~ '" ~.~ ~a ~.; :;~ ~;_t ;.. o 'r, .. " ~ v, c ~ftJ~ c.~~.sf': ;0: C ~~~~a ~ ~ '~r~ .;: ~ ~ ~~ t i~ ~ ~ ~ fi .~ ..,;..:::.~ .,.. -,;.,.:.... ~1EE ~~ iilW ii:~f8~~ - ~ ~ '~.-.' t ~ ',: :: ::! ....- - ~ ~ - !!Ii ~t:;c.- !ml~ ~~ ~ ~ Ee ~ C]~~ ='! ~:~ ~ ':.I - :.# .~ " ." ,. ., .E tJ ~~ r:.:..:: "'3-=:- ~ ~ =~ ':,.,~ !~ ~i. -= ~ Yo':: ,. - ;::;: U - <! ("i 2:1 " I ,,- - ,~CX' .., :J - -:" i - :a l:i ~ _ ,; . !: - " = '" ,::>1 I~f~ ~t::Si ';.I ~ = i ~ t "..,J ~ t~~ ~ f ~ 2~':;'=g.'''; /Ig ; .~ .~ .s ~ ~ '-' I ~ C';:!?"-= ':.I ~ 31~ nUH IE _.._,~" !UHn 11 - ~- J ~ ,. f .s ~ ;:; z " g.. ,. .~ - i ;; ;;s ., ~ ~ ~ ~ I >' - : . ,I'~ ~ " ~ . .~ ,- 0- t~ ~ ~ .~ i i~:. J; ~I ~ :- ~ g, ~ ~ J! :~ ;, ;.. Q ;..: .;- .s ~ ~ =- ":: - ... f'~ ?-~ ~~ .s~ ,- 1 ~ ~ - e~ i~ i~ '" !~ , ., 2: " ,. ~. .- c- ~ = - 2 ~ ~ 1;~ ~ ~ ~. ,.:::;:~ " j l~ [J CONNIE ONE I Street Closure Agenda Item 13 Page 7 gg ~~ ~i ~i~ .. !~i3 ~ :~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~"'., ~h ... ~J ~5~ ~~~ ~ti~ ~ '" e t;1~ ~~ ~~ ~~ i! ~ ".[ ,'I I ~ ~;;~ ~~i ~ '" ~ i :: 'l61 ,Sl"SOl "'" t l l~gH=-~ ,,:a;D;';'-:~ !5~~l!~ ~~~;.;..;a i 51 lilt:> I .-~"t: a)o.~is~o~ ~~~~~ll::~ ~"'!g~~~a~ d~,"~!;, ~ "'~~1l~ 5\:j~C3~:3 ,K'G;f (~I'd'.(I"'8'O) ~ 5531:r.J3 (]Nr'SS31r.>H1 ....-. lJOJ.uarrJSVJlIOAVjJ,M ~d :!d~ -~~~ !ll~~ ~~~ e o , ~ !!!...~ ...rR:5:!:::t; ~",a~'" o.:~~lilili ~w~ e; .::l' ~~ liR'!ii~ I~~~~~-tti 0 > ~ ~ ",../: - ~ ~ ~e~i ~ ~8'ii> ,... -'~.,.." ~ % ~. \ ~ __...., .1fo~::l: ~G.": ".<l:' <10;.. ...-~\\\ OZ,rUrN 7.~i6- c.:-.,;,:,-:-.." \~ ~ ~.~~~ \ ~ CONNIE !rAY - IHJ' '/rII1T1l R,Irr (D_D. Z103.p.rm} , yJ-'" ~~~"i~ h~o.:iil 5d~~~ ~~i5.." ~~~e5 blt ~ ~8~ -J dO ~8~~....:l ~~~ ~8< "'~ ~oO iL1~ U Q. c ~ 5 ~~'_ 6 ~ ~~~ (tS ~.t;;J, b :S ~~o U ~~~ <Ic.J - ;::0. 5 Cf:l ~~ . .., ~ ~o lE 05 !< SURVEY OF AREA TO BE CLOSED CONNIE ONE I Street Closure Agenda Item 13 Page 5 Item #13 & 14 Connie One, L.L. C. Discontinuance, closure and abandonment of a portion of Connie Lane beginning on the east side of Connie Way To the west side of Baker Road Change of Zoning District Classification North side of Connie Lane, approximately 124.18 feet east of Connie Way and on the south side of Connie Lane at its Intersection with Baker Road District 4/District 2 Bayside/Kempsvi lle April 11, 2006 REGULAR Barry Knight: Mr. Secretary, the next item to be heard? Joseph Strange: The next application is item 13 & 14, Connie One, L.L.c. An application of Connie One, L.L.c. for the discontinuance, closure and abandonment of a portion of Connie Lane beginning on the east side of Connie Way to the west side of Baker Road, and an application of Connie One, L.L.c. for a Change of Zoning District Classification from R-7.5 Residential District and I-I Light Industrial District to Conditional A-12 Apartment District on property located on the north side of Connie Lane, approximately 124.18 feet east of Connie Way and on the south side of Connie Lane at its intersection with Baker Road, District 4, Bayside, District 2, Kempsville with four proffers. Barry Knight: WeJcome R.J. R.J. Nutter: Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, for the record, my name is R.J. Nutter representing the applicant Connie One. Maybe I can speed things up for you in that this was on your consent agenda earlier. It was pulled from consent because there was a gentleman inside the adjacent neighborhood, Mr. Kirk Lee. But he is known as Mr. Kirk, but he could not stay. We did meet with him, and I would relay the issues that he raised, and at the end of the presentation to him he said he had no objection to the application. But I did want to let you know a little bit about what his concerns were so you will understand how he felt about his obligation. He had really two principal questions. Could I go to the overall aerial? This is fine right here. Mr. Kirk Jives right in this property right here (pointing to PowerPoint). We had met with the civic league, in this case the Newsome Farms Civic League on two occasions. Actually last summer and last fall. We made the presentation on the application, and the neighborhood had endorsed this plan that we presented to you. Since that time, a couple of months ago, the members of the Newsome Farms Civic League had heard that a church may own this property, and because the neighborhood had supported that church they wanted to make sure that this somehow was not undermining the church's position. So, we got to them and told them Item #13 & 14 Connie One, L.L.c. Page 2 that in fact that we actually purchased this property several years ago from the church. The church was no longer involved, and so that the plan we presented to them was the same plan that we were proposing today. He felt very comfortable with that position. The second question he had was that he wanted to make sure that we were closing all of Connie Lane. As you may know, staff recommended approval of that, but we went to the civic league meeting, or the association of the civic leagues, who this parcel belongs, I will tell you that the closure of that street is a much bigger significance to them then the technical closure which we often treat these things. The neighborhood was very concern that if Connie-Lane, which the improvements end with this cul-de-sac, it is a paper street down to Baker Road. Their concern was that if this street were ever constructed or required by the ordinance that Connie Lane would be a through lane for people to avoid Baker Road, and go to this portion of Baker Road and cut right through the neighborhood and go through there. That was a huge concern to the residents. The reason why they had supported the church is because the church was going to build a building that was going to block that street, and they wanted to make sure that was going to continue to be the case. So, they know now. This closure will take place from Connie Way all the way down. We will not have access from this development onto Connie Lane, and while we're closing all of this portion, we will actually be conveying one half of the street to her. Actually it is being given to her, and in turn we will be building a new driveway so that her driveway will come right in here. It is slightly modified. But the owners of this property will be doing that in the course of their development so they were very, very happy with that. So, I promised Mr. Kirk that I would relay those concerns to you and let you readdress them. But otherwise, I think we come with staff recommendation and the civic association is in favor, as well as the North West Beach Partnership, which is the coalition that area. But, Mr. Knight, I will try to be brief, and end it right there. Barry Knight: We appreciate it. Are there any questions for Mr. Nutter? Okay. Thank you. Mr. Strange, just for the record, will you call the first speaker? Joseph Strange: Speaking in opposition we have Gary Galumbeck. Gary Galumbeck: I'm sorry. I beg your pardon. Barry Knight: WeJcome sir. Gary Galumbeck: Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for hearing me. My name is Gary Galumbeck. I represent Charter Lakes Condominium Association. We are actually sandwiched between this proposed development and Baker Road. Barry Knight: .Would you LIse the pointer please sir? Gary Galumbeck: This is actually our spot here. Barry Knight: Okay. Item #13 & 14 Connie One, L.L.c. Page 3 Gary Galumbeck: Speaking for the association. A few years back when Baker Road extension was opened with the new development east of us, there was an increase in traffic, increase in noise, increase in crime. A lot of that came down Baker Road from the Newpoint Coinmunity and the Lake Edwards community, which was represented here earlier when we were discussing. Our concerns are not only about the noise and the crime, and the traffic, but that the apartments are going to bring an unwanted element to our little community. We're very concerned. There is a lot of affordable housing in the area. There are vacancies in the apartments. There are condominiums and townhouses, as well as single-family homes all around our community that are vacant, and currently under construction. So, there is not a need for this community. Also, if you look, I believe that is the copy of the survey, off of page 5. We feel that this portion right here (pointing to PowerPoint) I believe to be exact is the southeast terminus of where Connie Lane intersects with Baker Road is actually our property. And by looking at the plat, there is a square portion that says, "is now or formerly owned by Providence Development Corporation." There is a driveway there that would be the entrance to this community. I believe it is our property. Barry Knight: Is there anything else? Gary Galumbeck: No sir. Barry Knight: Okay. Are there any questions? Gary Galumbeck: Yes ma'am? Kathy Katsias: These condominiums are for sale. They are between $200 - $300 thousand dollars. Gary Galumbeck: Yes ma' am. Some of them are on the lesser side. There are townhouses to the east of us actually just on the other side of Baker Road that are in the low hundreds. Kathy Katsias: That was not my understanding. I thought they were going to start at $200,000? Gary Galumbeck: You're talking about this new community? Kathy Katsias: Yes, this new development. Gary Galumbeck: I'm not aware of the pricing on that. Kathy Katsaias: Isn't that a street closure, so there is not going to be any access. Gary Galumbeck: If they close Connie the access would be from Baker Road. Item #13 & 14 Connie One, L.L. C. Page 4 Kathy Katsias: From Connie Lane. Right? Barry Knight: It's from Baker. Mr. Nutter is going to address that when he comes back. Okay. Ms. Anderson? Janice Anderson: So, this residential development behind your development, you are worried it is going to increase crime? Gary Galumbeck: Well, with apartments coming in, we feel it would bring noise, which would be a major concern, as well as excessive traffic. Janice Anderson: More than the industrial site behind you? Gary Galumbeck: Well, basically, it is vacant. It was used as a storage facility for automotive repair facility had been there for years and years. Janice Anderson: Okay. I thought it was active. Gary Galumbeck: No ma'am. Janice Anderson: Okay. I think these are for sale? Is that correct? Right. Gary Galumbeck: The apartments are not for sale. Janice Anderson: There are four units in each building, I believe, and I believe they are for sale. Like Ms. Katsias said, they are going to sell for $200 - 300 thousand dollars. Were you aware of that? Gary Galumbeck: No ma'am. We were told that there would be a mixture of rental units, as well as units for sale. Janice Anderson: Okay. My understanding about the application, and I'm sure Mr. Nutter will go over with you. It is one type of product that they're proposing right now. Gary Galumbeck: Okay. Janice Anderson: Okay? Gary Galumbeck: Thank you for clearing that up. Barry Knight: Are there any other questions? Thank you sir. Gary Galumbeck: Thank you. Item #13 & 14 Connie One, L.L.c. Page 5 Joseph Strange: There are no other speakers. Barry Knight: Mr. Nutter? You've heard a couple of questions? R.J. Nutter: Yes, I sure have. Let me try to address them for you. First, this is not an apartment complex. Maybe he is confused with the "A" designation for the zoning characterization. But, these are condominiums. They are for sale units. We anticipate their price being between $200 - $300 thousand dollars, which is right in line. We checked with the housing prices of the units around us and they are right in line with those, and as far as access, and what we did do, and as I told you. It is a major concern to the civic association in the area not to have Connie Lane extended, and so we have not provided access for our property by Connie Lane. Our access way will be here (pointing to PowerPoint) off of Baker Road. The reason why this application took so long to get to you quite frankly, and remember I told you that we met with the civic association during the late summer and fall of last year, was because of the enormous amount of issues we had to face and get approval from all of the properties to make sure. There were a small series of rental properties. I can tell you that we filed certificates with the City Treasurer's office indicating that we own all of the property in the confines of this area, or have it under contract. So, the access way that you see here, we just indicated, and we believe frankly that this complex th~lt is in here, which is very nice as well, quite frankly, this area is in very serious problem. Those who of you went on the van trip know that very well. There is actually people living there, in the school buses. A gentleman has been living in a school bus for 17 years. This property owner, my client had to locate and purchased a mobile home to get them out of this property. There is a small business there. It does continue to operate. You may not see it as much but the residents of Newsome Farms see it everyday. They don't like it very much. So, we feel we are bringing in some substantial improvement to the property. I'm happy to tell you that the possible reception of the people behind the junkyard, we think it is pretty much unanimous. So, we would as for your endorsement. It is a very nice product. It is keeping with the area. They are for sale units as we indicated. Barry Knight: Thank you. Are there any questions for Mr. Nutter? Okay. Okay, Mr. Bayside and Mr. Kempsville? It is in your districts. What's your pleasure? Henry Li vas: I would move that we approve it. Barry Knight: Okay. David Redmond: I'll second it. Barry Knight: Okay. There is a motion on the table to approve agenda item 13 & 14. A motion made by Henry Livas and seconded by David Redmond. Is there any discussion? Mr. Redmond? Item #13 & 14 Connie One, L.L.c. Page 6 David Redmond: I just want to make the point. I think the one speaker that was verbal mentioned the amount of new development in this neck of our woods. This is part of our city that has not always enjoyed the greatest fortune, in some ways. There has however, in recent years, I think, has been a real refreshing interest and improvement in housing stock. In this ca<;e, there is only what can be described, in my view as a junkyard on the site. And, this project promises, not only to eliminate that, but to continue to contribute, I think to improving the housing stock in this part of Virginia Beach. Not only would I not want to get in the way of that, I would actively encourage it to the greatest extent that we can. When you drive up and down there, it is making a real difference in the appearance of that neighborhood, and ultimately it is going to make a real difference in retail, in the office, and all of the things that give any community life. So, I wholeheartedly support this application. I think it is unquestionably an improvement. And, I look forward to supporting it. Barry Knight: Thank you Mr. Redmond. Is there any other discussion? There is a motion on the floor. We'll call for the question. AYE 9 NAY 0 ABSO ANDERSON AYE BERNAS AYE CRABTREE AYE HENLEY HORSLEY AYE KA TSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE LIVAS AYE REDMOND AYE STRANGE AYE WOOD ABSENT 2 ABSENT ABSENT Ed Weeden: Bya vote of 9-0, the Board has approved the applications of Connie One, L.L.c. Barry Knight: Thank you. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 IN THE MATTER OF CLOSING, VACATING AND DISCONTINUING A PORTION OF THAT CERTAIN STREET KNOWN AS "CONNIE LANE VAR. WIDTH R/W" AS SHOWN ON THAT CERTAIN PLAT ENTITLED "EXHIBIT PLAT PROPOSED STREET CLOSURE OF A PORTION OF CONNIE LANE VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA" WHEREAS, Connie One, L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company, (the "Applicant") 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 one (1) year from City Council's adoption of this Ordinance; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia: SECTION I That the closed and vacated, or before one (1) ordinance: hereinafter described street be discontinued, subj ect to certain conditions being met on year from City Council's adoption of this All that certain piece or parcel of land situate, lying and being in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, designated and described as "CONNIE LANE - VAR. WIDTH R/W" and also described as "STREET CLOSURE AREA = 33,830 SQ. FT. - 0.777 ACRE I" shown as the hatched area on that certain plat entitled: "EXHIBIT PLAT PROPOSED STREET CLOSURE OF A PORTION OF CONNIE LANE VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA" Scale: 1" = 50', dated August 10, 2006, prepared by The Spectra Group, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A. GPINS: 1468-50-3176, 1468-50-4334, 1468-50-4484, 1468- 50-5086, 1468-50-7212, 1467-59-9982 and 1467-79-2977 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 SECTION II The following conditions must be met on or before one (1) year from City Council's adoption of this ordinance: 1. The City Attorney's Office will make the final determination regarding ownership of the underlying fee. The purchase price to be paid to the City shall be determined according to the "Policy Regarding Purchase of City's Interest in Streets Pursuant to Street Closures," approved by City Council. Copies of said policy are available in the Planning Department. 2. The applicant shall resubdi vide vacate internal lot lines to incorporate the the adjoining parcels. The resubdivision submi tted and approved for recordation prior closure approval. the property and closed area into plat shall be to final street 3. The applicant easements requested by the Utilities Department. shall City provide all of Virginia the required Beach Public 4. The applicant shall verify that no private utili ties exist wi thin the right-of-way proposed for closure. Preliminary corrnnents from the utility companies indicate that there are no private utilities within the right-of-way proposed for closure. If private utilities do exist, the applicant shall provide easements satisfactory to the utility companies. 5. The applicant shall provide access single-family dwelling, known as 5448 Connie Lane, directly north of the proposed right-of-way closure. for the located 6. Closure of the right-of-way shall be contingent upon compliance with the above stated conditions within one (1) year of approval by City Council. If all conditions noted above are not in compliance and the final plat is not approved within one (1) year of the City Council vote to close the street, this approval will be considered null and void. 2 90 SECTION III 91 92 1. If the preceding conditions are not fulfilled on 93 or before May 21, 2008, this Ordinance will be deemed null and 94 void without further action by the City Council. 95 96 2. If all conditions are met on or before May 21, 97 2008, the date of final closure is the date the street closure 98 ordinance is recorded by the City Attorney. 99 100 3. In the event the City of Virginia Beach has any 101 interest in the underlying fee, the City Manager or his designee 102 is authorized to execute whatever documents, if any, that may be 103 requested to convey such interest, provided said documents are 104 approved by the City Attorney's Office. 105 106 SECTION IV 107 108 A certified copy of this Ordinance shall be filed in 109 the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia 110 Beach, Virginia, and indexed in the name of the CITY OF VIRGINIA 111 BEACH as "Grantor" and CONNIE ONE, L.L.C., as "Grantee." 112 113 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, 114 Virginia, on this day of , 2007. 115 116 117 THIS ORDINANCE REQUIRES AN AFFIRMATIVE VOTE OF THREE-FOURTHS OF 118 ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS ELECTED TO COUNCIL. CA10173 v :\applicalions\cilylawprod\cycom32\ WpdocslDO 16\POO2\OOO31646.DOC R-1 April 18, 2007 APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: c~~ 3 ~ ro:;'l ~ ~ ~~ ~~ t:::~ S!~ >-.-2..-2. ~~~ "'i5~ a"-~ :~~ ::~l5 ~<!;i5 0.1'-' ~~~ :za;~ '<0.0. ... 3 ~2;~ ~5~ "" ::'::::t':c:L ~~'" "''-'~ ,,""... ;;!:"''' ~ 0; ~ ~l t;~ "",., ~~ ~~ '" ""... s8 ~:;;, >:'-' !2 <:. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (Q~ ... .... ~ ~ ~....?, ~;: . G>. ~ ~~o; ~~~~ '~cP ~~ ~ e, % ..,+ , ...... ~~\ / <l tS:\l~'\ >. .... i\\\'\ ~ / .Z ,.; ~ 11~" ./ ./ \~' .,/ "'/E~o ) . ...'. p,vS p. 1 ....../~\ S1 ..../ (II.B' 25~, ~..../ i;l ~ i!'~.../ t:i ..- \~ ..... ~ 9i t:' ..., i!l ~~~:g~ ~ ~ ~~?-: i!q.,i!l:e .:ll"" 15 C~":.-'?t: Q.dei:x:~a..::2ti ~~~~~~:!In iQ:Q.V) a:! ~~~ ~ ~.e..~&~:f ~ .e.. n ';:;~(..) i:S ~: ~ ~~ '" . '" ~~ Exhibit A ~i ~ ili '" p '-' :s" ~~~~~~ ~'<~~a.:cL;;~ ;l;;:;jel1!","'o:"!' ~~~~~~:::! ~C::ltW '~~:i: ~~~~~5 s; e ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ ~-~ 81,t)8 ~~~ ::.:: 0...8 !5 " ~ ;: ~ ~ ~ i!; !2 <:. .... " l!; ~[l61 . ';G'60~ ii~~ii'~ "'-- 0.: a: a: ,:,,:a:a.: ~...;...;it!~~ ~~t::;~-:IQ ~~ai~~~~ s.ee~e.- op l o.:~~~~ ,,).. -J ~ .~".rj'" o~ o~ ~~~Ql,t)ct: c~s;~....?~~ !W:ill s: O:l:!"<., IS 8 ....Ol;:; o.~~~~;.~ ~~~5~ - "" ~;~ ~~-;.;- ~CJ..:~ ~~~. ~......~ ~a:!""" . €!..o:. ~ ~ ,'~'991 1<: (9~1 'd 'lit '8'0) / SS3~~3 OIN SS3~:JN1 ~ ....._ ~01 lN3l'i3S'c'J ~O M/~ ,O~ p . ~:s is:z;~ ~~;o- 2~~ ~ ~~ 0: - ~~rt' ~S~ e; e; 0; .:z.VJ.e, ~""~~ fSdnlrl ~~~~ e- _ 15;~~ ;t;1$~cti ~~~e NOWSOd 10 lfJO (1)ONOO NI Nld ;:; NNIE WAY - 50' JrIDTH Rjrr CO (D.B. 2703. P. 1373) vJ-) \"ro" " V. '),1'" \)~. ~~. cr:>~ #,S ......v.fS OZ'!I!I1 "- ~ ~'" I o .B'~:::t: ~. ~~o:~~g~ 1:::.< ~Q,.a.:lt)"")(:3 Q:: C:::l. 101011( ~~!:i~~"l:!'1.~ ~~~-~~~~~ =:EQ;a:~~CI;)t"O ~ ~e.e&~ '" '" ~ I::: ....J~n MamIOS!I:Jln lO',rz ,~9'tr 3 r~ttsrN o~,n .9rN CM.OD '1/.... TO' MczmK)S!lN! ~~uorltf .-...... ~ ~:;: ~~~~~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~ u "tb U .(',jc6 :Sc:i~~:! "'g;fs 0;;1; ~ ~ 0:: e.& t;:;~~~~15; CS:!~~~~ '" '-' ~~~ikik u _~;:;~~~ a:~IIIO""""". 5~~ai~ ~~~9~~ l.u ~ -01<.0- -J en g~~~~ ~ i!"~;' '0....... cjP~~~t !..w Q ~....~~..,. :::::;: Ct:: ~~~~~~ :::> ~ It'j I()":g ~ U ~ -"'")2 OO'J "'&8gg~ ~~g5l5l:il ~-C'\,j"''''1I'') ~<..lu(,J(,Ju '-' ~1.>l'4 ~~~ '5",,, ~""'b ~\.5 ,.",'" 'i w E-<s u:i :J ~~~ ~t;j~~ E-< w!;::w ..-c ~O~ ~"'o..Z Io-lO<Z ~~~O u:i~ U 0.. ~ '" ~ 51... Ol;;;~ <' 1.....0 -1"9 r'"' I'~:;; "--" ~.;., ~'- cd ~ ~,' bl:~ C) $~ ~~ Q),,~~ f- 0' (f.) ~ ~ ~~~ "'~ ~!.,~ ;1! 2 ~ ~- ~ ~t;~ u _~ ~ .'8~ 00( 5S:c ~ I...n '-' ~-- ~ ~ . w i7)~ u "'0 ~~ << oE3 o '" Conditional Zoning Change: from R7.5 to Conditional A-12 ~::,.., ~~... ~ -la 'fc%~ ,':':'.\,..) (t:..,;~) (u ...>) .: ::> {~~-:. III ~"''''~ .;; ......~ CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Application of Connie One, L.L.C. for a Chanae of Zonina District Classification from R-7.5 Residential District and 1-1 Light Industrial District to Conditional A-12 Apartment District on property located on the north side of Connie Lane, approximately 124.18 feet east of Connie Way and on the south side of Connie Lane at its intersection with Baker Road (GPINs 1468507212; 1468505086; 1468503176). DISTRICT 4 - BAYSIDE AND DISTRICT 2- KEMPSVILLE MEETING DATE: May 22, 2007 . Background: The applicant proposes to rezone the existing site, currently consisting of an unimproved portion of Connie Lane and properties zoned R-7.5 Residential and 1-1 Light Industrial, to Conditional A-12 Apartment District for the purpose of developing the site with multi-family dwellings. The proposed closure of the unimproved portion of Connie Lane is presented as a separate item on this agenda. . Considerations: The applicant proposes 13 buildings with four units in each. The submitted plan also shows associated parking and landscaping. The proposed units will be condominium, ranging in price from $200,000 to $300,000. The proposed buildings are two-story in height, and constructed of faux cedar shake and vinyl siding. There will be two and three bedroom units, with an approximate floor area of 1,800 square feet. The Comprehensive Plan Map designates this area of the city as being part of the Primary Residential Area. The land use planning policies and principles for the Primary Residential Area focus on preserving and protecting the overall character, economic value and aesthetic quality of the stable neighborhoods located in this area. The site is currently occupied by a nonconforming automobile repair facility and bulk storage yard. This nonconforming use is too intense for the surrounding residential uses, and has a negative impact on the surrounding community due to the distressed condition of the property, the inoperable vehicles and vehicle parts stored on the site, and the hazard the site presents. The applicant's proposal provides a vastly more compatible use. The proposed density is in keeping with density in the surrounding area. The proposed site layout provides a coordinated development with respect to design, landscaping, parking layout, and traffic control and circulation. The proposed building design is in keeping with and Connie One, L.L.C. Page 2 of 2 complementary to existing multi-family development in the surrounding area. The request, therefore, is acceptable and will relieve the surrounding residential area of a nonconforming commercial use. There was opposition to the request. . Recommendations: The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 9-0 to approve this request, as proffered. . Attachments: Staff Review Disclosure Statement Planning Commission Minutes Location Map Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends approval. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department ~ ~ City Manager~ l1. ' ~~ ~ CONNIE ONE, L.L.C. Agenda Item 14 April 11 , 2007 Public Hearing Staff Planner: Faith Christie REQUESTS: ChanQe of ZoninQ District Classification from R-7.5 Residential District and 1-1 Light Industrial District to Conditional A-12 Apartment District ADDRESS I DESCRIPTION: Property located on the north side of Connie Lane, approximately 124.18-feet east of Connie Way, and on the south side of Connie Lane at its' intersection with Baker Road COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT: 4 - BA YSIDE & 2 - KEMPSVILLE SITE SIZE: 4.318 acres GPIN: 14685072120000; 14685050860000; 14685031760000 SUMMARY OF REQUEST The applicant proposes to rezone the existing R-7.5 Residential, 1-1 Light Industrial properties, and a portion of Connie Lane to Conditional A-12 Apartment District and to develop the site with multi-family dwellings. The submitted site plan depicts 13 buildings of four units each, associated parking, and landscaping. The proposed units will be condominium style ownership, ranging in price from $200,000 to $300,000. The proposed buildings are two-story in height, and constructed of faux cedar shake and vinyl siding. There will be two and three bedroom units, with an approximate floor area of 1,800 square feet. LAND USE AND ZONING INFORMATION EXISTING LAND USE: The site is occupied by an automotive repair faciity and junkyard. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: South: East: . Single-family dwellings / R-7.5 Residential . Multiple-family dwellings / A-12 Apartment . Single-family dwellings / A-12 Apartment with a PD-H2 Planned Unit Overlay r.c...... -_ ,'. ":' _,'_'_,,',,' ',' . "--...--.-::,,, '-""":::'.:, -',"--:..:-,-..,.;', CONNIE €)~E tRezo~ing ~gEmdaltemJ4 R~g~J West: . Single-family dwellings / R-7.5 Residential NATURAL RESOURCE AND CULTURAL FEATURES: There are no natural resources or cultural features to speak of existing on the site. A portion of the site is partially treed with underbrush, and the balance of the site is currently being used as a bulk storage yard for the automobile repair facility. AICUZ: The site is in an AICUZ of Less than 65 dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana. IMPACT ON CITY SERVICES MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN (MTP) I CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP): Baker Road is a two-lane undivided minor arterial roadway that currently dead-ends just east of Connie Lane. The Baker Road Extended roadway improvements project will extend Baker Road east to Witchduck Road. There is an existing house that fronts on and has a driveway from the piece of Connie Lane at Connie Way that the applicant has applied to have vacated. The applicant must include provisions in the right- of-way closure application (separate application and staff report) to provide this property access for this lot to a public roadway. Associated with the above comment, the applicant will be responsible for roadway modifications at the Connie Lane and Connie Way intersection so that the current "T" intersection becomes a 90-degree roadway bend if the right-of-way closure is approved by the City of Virginia Beach. TRAFFIC: Street Name Present Present Capacity Generated Traffic Volume Baker Road N/A 15,000 ADT 1 Existing Land Use ~ - 215 ADT Proposed Land Use 3 - 349 ADT Average Dally Trips 2 as defined by R-7.5 & 1-1 zonings 3 as defined by 52 multi-family dwelling units WATER: This site must connect to City water. There is an a-inch City water main on Connie Lane, and an existing 6-inch water main on Connie Way. SEWER: This site must connect to City sanitary sewer. Analysis of Pump Station #344 and the sanitary sewer collection system is required to ensure future flows can be accommodated. There is an a-inch City sanitary sewer gravity main on Connie Way and existing 10-inch City sanitary sewer gravity main on Connie Lane, continuing through a 35-foot wide public utility easement to Aylesbury Drive. CONNIE ONE I Rezoning Agenda Item 14 , Page 2 SCHOOLS: School Current Capacity Generation 1 Change 2 Enrollment Newtown Road 609 543 12 10 Elementary Bavside Middle 1,189 1,269 6.2 5 Bavside HiQh 2,012 1,896 5.7 4 -, " " generation represents the number of students that the development will add to the school 2 "change" represents the difference between generated students under the existing zoning and under the proposed zoning. The number can be positive (additional students) or negative (fewer students). A new elementary school is currently under construction adjacent to Newtown Road Elementary that will provide relief to Newtown Road and B. F. Williams elementary schools when it opens during the 2008- 2009 school year. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of this request with the submitted proffers. The proffers are provided below. EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan Map designates this area of the city as being part of the Primary Residential Area. The land use planning policies and principles for the Primary Residential Area focus strongly on preserving and protecting the overall character, economic value and aesthetic quality of the stable neighborhoods located in this area. Evaluation: Staff finds the request to rezone the properties from R-7.5 Residential District and 1-1 Light Industrial District to Conditional A-12 Apartment District acceptable. Currently, the site is occupied by a nonconforming automobile repair facility and bulk storage yard. This nonconforming use is too intense for the surrounding residential uses; the applicant's proposal provides a vastly more compatible use. The proposed density is in keeping with density in the surrounding area. The proposed site layout provides a coordinated development with respect to design, landscaping, parking layout, and traffic control and circulation. The proposed building design is in keeping with and complementary to existing multi-family development in the surrounding area. Staff, therefore, concludes the request to rezone the existing R-7.5 Residential, 1-1 Light Industrial properties, and the portion of Connie Lane being closed to Conditional A- 12 Apartment District and to develop the site with multi-family dwellings project is acceptable and will relieve the surrounding residential area of a nonconforming commercial use. PROFFERS The following are proffers submitted by the applicant as part of a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA). The applicant, consistent with Section 107(h) of the City Zoning Ordinance, has voluntarily submitted these proffers in an attempt to "offset identified problems to the extent that the proposed rezoning is acceptable," (91 07(h)(1)). Should this application be approved, the proffers will be recorded at the Circuit Court and serve CONNIE ONE / Rezoning Agenda Item ,14 Pag~ 3 as conditions restricting the use of the property as proposed with this change of zoning. PROFFER 1: When developed, the Property shall be developed in substantial conformance with the exhibit titled "Connie Manor Preliminary Site Plan", dated 11/30/06, and prepared by the Spectra Group, Inc., a copy of which has been exhibited to the City Council and is on file with the City Planning Department (the "Conceptual Plan"). PROFFER 2: When developed, Grantor shall install landscaping and a fence, each in accordance with the Category IV requirements of the City's Landscaping Guide, along the northwestern boundary of the Property north of Connie Lane, as shown on the Conceptual Plan. PROFFER 3: When developed, the residential buildings constructed on the Property shall be constructed in substantial conformance with the building elevations titled "Connie Manor Building Elevation I" and "Connie Manor Building Elevation II", which elevations have been exhibited to the City Council and are on file in the Planning Department of the City of Virginia Beach (the "Elevations"). PROFFER 4: Further conditions may be required by the Grantee during detailed Site Plan review and administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City Agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements. STAFF COMMENTS: The proffers are acceptable as they insure the site will be developed in accordance with the submitted preliminary site and elevation plans. The submitted preliminary site plan depicts a coordinated development of the site in terms of design, landscaping, parking layout, and traffic control and circulation within the site. The submitted preliminary elevation plan depicts buildings that are complementary to existing buildings in the area. The City Attorney's Office has reviewed the proffer agreement dated August 1, 2006, and found it to be legally sufficient and in acceptable legal form. NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances. Plans submitted with this rezoning application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes and Standards. The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. .Y.y. CONNIE ONE / Rezoning Agenda Item 14 , Page 4 AERIAL OF SITE LOCAl'I€>N ,.." '\< CONNIE ONE / Rezoning Agenda Item..14 P~ge 5 N\f1d 3J.IS ~3l:Id 1lOtM"l3lNNOO ~ lZ! ~ 8 " /\ ; ~,; % ~<-., ~...~ ;,., -. ....~ ...~;,. ~..-' ""+ <St.. ~4> ,/-,\ , . ~. \,-"....~ r\ \,j ,.....-< ( . 1 \....../1 ...---. Iii.: >:: "T'- I I I ..........'., y~ f: SE 'i.? 8 \ \~o "\, \. \ \ PROPOSED StTEJ:~ AN .alII H.uI.lJl ,os - ..II'M 311.NO:l CONNIE ~NE / Rez9~ing ,i\genda Item..14 "8,~~~6 PROPOSED BUILDING ELEVAtiON CONNIE ()NE I HezQr;}ing Agenda IterTt14 Page 7 - '" .,.. ,. -= !; ;: t: .:E..~ ~..~ =~ = - !"'.:: :c ;..,,;= ::: =- PROPOSED BUILDING ELEVATION. CONNIE pNE / RezQ~ing A~enda IterJ'l.14 Page 8 Me~ffft ~-~cele Connie One, LLC ~t;~O 4 'l ~~~~Of ~kJ~-v;.~~ ~ <:5 O~~K . 0 C;o: l::j'J ~It.,,. -<1 'I' ~ VI; ~~ 't'-J, ~ _~ QO ~ ~ ' ~~ If--......."'" 'f-.... .... .J:::!c..:g.J .-1/ ~ r, 11 9, ' ~ ;>::~ ~w, f (f}(j ~~. /' "a. ~ "",. fJ q · 0, " ~!!h~~7;~'f1ff$ :Pi-~ {} ~c:. ~ ~ & .:j J.':J r;':'1 ~b';) ['-,..,;;t ~ ~ ":j 1$) c::'::J 1ft 0 , 0 ~'K1J<~ ~Ocu."" ~li' " .5 ,/ D? Do, '" _~ . (>~QJ.K 3~ "-'()(/~:<!;1 ~ ..r _ .5: \) ~{y~ ~O'iJ~ o &~CJ/( ~~(ffiJ~ 's ~.... (j ~~\I . lJ(J~ ~ I" ...Gi c::1 ~ ~ I:,..,:~~~~~ ,.., ~C::5 _, o~ ~~Ifi1~ ~J.1e<Q-f/R-9'~~~ ~'Jh.~~ _ ifli~ - rTu.un )I(I~~~((~ ~~<.JVQn::; A.';; t( 'J I..JJ f:ifi. Il[ . fj 2 'III." -UJ!l- ~ 0 _ VUI..f... H ~'/ Ij6 - ,'11"t1 ~./ ~' ,,- ~ i' ;i1;m .:",,7 R-7.5 '- ~iL{lr~ Irs ~~ ~ &5DpARK A; " ~ WA PElt r;, r:JY m Il~ r-. ~:J!Jlr-) If ~ r:J., ? Conditional Zoning Change: from R7.5 to Conditional A-12 " JifPlJ WIiI/~ 1. 10/11/66 Rezoning (R-S 4 Residence Suburban to M-I 3 General Industrial) Approved Conditional Use Permit (Bulk Storage / Contractor Storage Yard) 5/21/79 Denied 2. 9/22/92 Reconsideration of Conditions (Subdivision Variance) Approved 12/1 8/90 Subdivision Variance Approved 3. 9/28/99 Street Closure Approved 2/9/99 Rezoning (R-7.5 Residential to A-12 Apartment with a PD-H2 Planned Approved Unit Overlav) 4. 1/26/99 Rezoning (R-7.5 Residential and A-12 Apartment to Conditional A-12 Approved Apartment) 6/2/92 Conditional Use Permit (Recreational Facility) Denied 2/27/89 Conditional Use Permit (Fill Borrow Pit) Withdrawn 5. 5/8/01 Conditional Use Permit (Church) Denied 10/23/90 Conditional Use Permit (Church) Denied ZONING HISTORY ,~': ....~...' CONNIE ONE / Rezot!)ing Agenda Iterl"l 14 8ag~9 I- ;z ~ .. Co r....' E= -< I- 1.1::. ;:..;: Q:: ;;i 1.1::. o ...; U 1.1::. :5 ~ --.;::1 ;:: ~l ~: 2 ~.- ~ ,:~,_r,:' ~.,:,',,-.,.' _. . ;;~ ii,:j,! '[-b~ '"',O~ ~ ~!~ :'h':: '. -:-';'~~~'..", -~""-,:,-,,,~. ~;~,.',.. . Q ,~E~ Ii un III . _ .., Cl.1 ~rg,i ~~~ a ~gj~ HI g -~ :~ = :>...- 8 '57 " ~ g ':i1;;!;:1 utili ....;, ~ ~ "f-(~= ;r. \00 -..... r; mdii~i s; ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ :~ f:~ ~] '~ ~ ~ ~,~ ~:~ ; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~a ? 6 '~s:~ ~~_~~.s ~-;'::~Q--~::; mnUH~ :: .=~u-~~"Eho~u " IJi1 i'IJf~ JjhSI ~j ~;~ ~ ~,i i ~ ~ j ~ 12! ~ AS S4 S:! ~ ~ ~ ~ Efi:~~~ ',_.)I~ ,~~ E ,$ c:. d l d ,;: ~-3 5i! E ~ '{J" l~ ~ ~ !; ~.~ ~JJ~ ~;~~~~ 1- 6.'~-=-'" ,5-:5 ~~ 2.= E -E'~ g 2 ~ 8~&.~~~ ,g &. ] ,~ :E ~ s~~gf;;::- ]'~:5~6~ ,S ~t::s E.= .s'~~ ~~~ j~~~ ~~ 'nm ~ - - c ... E~~,s~~ ~~~~n~ Q5 .::: ~':a ~ ~ 0 ,-: :"-"""!l;~I'" ; E ~ ~ .~ a I~ ... "g -e ~ ':i ;j is: ~':5..~:SE: ~< ," NOI.LV:>I'lddV nNINOZ3H 'IVNOI.LI<INO;) lj~ - 0 f"~ 8 t ~.,i l~~ ;~~ v.: ~ _ ~~~ m s =i: ~ ~ g -,- ;;: ~~ ~E ] E.~ ~ ~ ~ ....=....: j'l] !~e ~~~. ~ v~,~ 2:''e ~~ ._ 0 ~\,,) .~ 'S '" ~ 1i ;; ~ ,~ i5 ~ 't; ~I -4 "gj "'I -01 .~ ~i tl il -~I ~I ~J ~I cii ~I gl ~I >1 ::1 =1 ~1 "%1 :::t :,1 ", <> e 2. 8 ~ '" ~ ~ E ~ ~ ~':::: 5~ ;r., :Z 5 u ~.~ EL ] ~~ e ~ 2 u ~] "- " ~.~ "S t: Q.. ~- :::f c ~ ~ ~ ~ lIil ~. 3 = c ~ E' ~ !~ ~. l: ,~ z .~ ~ "E '.~ ~ '" '" ~ ] i ~ . ~~ ] ~. 'B l~ e ::: ;';:;-, ~~ $'"t, 0;. ~ '" :: ~ - ~-~ ,~ ~ ..C-;:.: "" e a- .~ .B N ~i =1 "51 ~i .~ l<i :;J ~J ~I ~ S1 ~ ~l ~ \,,'! 1!'::""'! .. ~ .. C -i' ~ t: s- ir ;~ ~ ~ 'i 1 ~ l ~ .~ .s .~ ~ ~ I I I I i 1 i I \ I ~I { ;~ @ ~' 2..~ ~':::-: ...., - ~..::::: -= ~ e~ .~: ] ,~ c. '.,. ~ .:~ < Z ~ jij Z '2 "- ~ g ~ " ~ ~ .- i ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ I i )1 ;: ,~ E ~ ~ .-~ ..E .: ,g ,ff ~ ~ g is. c c e. c " -~ ~,;:3 :r:~... ~~-~ o i::;! o ~ 'g ~ ~ ".:;.;C ~. ...., - -- :;:.~-~ ~i~ ~ 5;::<:: $ ...iEi! " ~$a ~B a E',g Jf~ ~ ~~g~~_t c....,~~E ,~ g~ E:;, ~~,_...- ~ ~ s - 0 ~ -t..a>,_~ ~ - .- ~~ ~ E'5~ ;:,_-:;c.. .~2~a~ ifW id " .~ ~ !... ~ ~ ,~ ~ .~ g:~ .s~ ... .E I~, E ~ 00-' -e I ~ _~ 15'~ iO <"~ ,. " .::; '" .. e ~ 'b g 'Z;; .s ~ c. :.a Yo ~ € " Co " 0; E- 1:i d .... ~ '" .. % ~ ci fl ~~ ~~ t& : c v ,~ B s '.;0 ~ ~ .~ ~ .. " " ~ :n CONNIE ONE / Rezoning Agenda Item 14 Page 10 o '" NOIIV:JI'lddV :l1I11S0'l3 I:tl:nIIS~ ~ t :g 11.: ~~'i' _- _- ._ ".>'I > '_ ~.; "E .g" a .a' ~ Q --=~.- "" eo ----7,' e~=~E'C <..... E","'5?'?!~ u~::.:;,<')-li " ~ ~ ~'~ ~ 2 ' C d S .::'-5 S "" .c ~e; ,g g-~ /'g ~lifii ~.~ 'S "" .. Q.E' S ->1.- ~ 6-':i a ~ ~=: ;.a ~ ~~ ~ .~~~fi~ I g.:;,~-; ?-s ~.~~~.~~ ,:= "'. s.c a \3.;;: jft)ii ~J:-.E~B~ i~-:a.s~~ iil;i~. h ,~ "';';d ji~:l~~ >~ .. _ .- -:.n ~ - ~::-,_ tS~ ~ ~.1 ~ gt.~ ~ ~~41'~ ;:::::Qc;..-..::t:;9 ': ~ 2:'::'::'~ S,..;: !E ~ ~ 1 R 2.0 ~ il.i. ~.~. ~ o.~ 0 ~ - ;";5Sa-5-=~ 1< ~ ~ I ~i ~ B ~ -=i~1 __ VI ;,;II ~~ ~ ~:I ;:~; ~ j, >>g~ ~ 5l ,;;_B ~~E ~I ~I , - c if. ;!A ~i ~ ~ ': ~ 1'- '-~,>-~ ... ""pi ~ g! ~ 1 ! ~gl '~I ']: ~"~g ;~,~i! :~i ~ ~s~ .~I z ~ ,5 @'\, ;"1 ~ &! 9 ;;;=s~ILi ~~i~ ~~, ~ I 9 >~ ~ ~ E 'El 2 · , :i "" "; ,,1 iI mUi-1 i 3il.:: bl21~ -g.!i 1 ;, ~~ ~ Q.'~ _ ~t ,~I ":1 -~ "g s '~;a~ ~i ~~~~~~!~! .: [e ~\~ \~! ~ , '" ,~ '~; _. ~ E-~ -g B :t W ':) ~ ci Hi ,~ ~ ~ -'- -55': Q.~l..l: ~ [~ ~~~ fooo -= = :;e ~ E ::io'I 0 ~ - ~ :;;.. 3 ~c~ ~= '~e ~ ~ ~ ::: :t' ... ~j~ :;:.... ,,ti,l;iI? ~ ~'.~. in .as ''E~-- :~ ~ ~ ~ ~.5 .~ ~ ro. ;!' ~~ i :, ; ~. a:t~ v~2... "" .~ ,""c ~~ i]c.~E: ~ . ~ ~ o~ ~^~ ! i j ~ ~ ~ i ~~ --~-~~'~~.$ ~ t~ ~ ~ ~ ~talliilt - l "" : .~. c], ..~ A= -r ~ ~ ~ ~ g.~ ~ ~ -< J~~ij ~~1~ j ;. ; :;,]'~ ~ ~ ~ ~:; ~.~ ~ @:i -5 I.[~ ~ ,:,) ::: c.... ."~ ~ "=5: ;!;!IIIIII I I ; , , " IE Ie l:z La I:: I I i , Ij Ii Ii i", IIi I,~ I; Ig I"'~ en H~ I~ I :" ,[ Ie I.:" ~ ;:;l ::; ;:;l ;.... < 1- <L) ;:;l C:i: ;::l <L) o ..:i U <L) Q _.:., - Z r-..." ~ ~ ;- <: ;.. ?J:J 0- oj g OR .E. ~ ~' ^. -5 '/i 'J ,- o~ "- ~ ~ " .E ~ '" i " ;..i, ] -' -, '", !;I i! -5 ~ "" ~ :i '" ~! l( 0 ~< ;;; ~ ~; ~ :::i 5 ~ ~; ::::: ~ " ~ -' ~ .s ~! g 'C: i ,... ;1 c 0' g ~! '" ~ '" z c ~ ~1 -;. ~l - ~r, .2 " ,. r -, ., 'r; "',! " " '<.)~ '" ,.... ^ - ::: ~~ \ ~ 'S " ~ ]1, 8, '- ";; EO' :; ~ i -& ~ ,~I '" -==1 :..i r.;~! 5 ~ E >1 :.~" .~,' 0 i >..J S '''' ~ ;r...c ~ .: Q E a ~;:;.. k- -< ~~:f ~!d~~ e~~-...::...e :H!: ~ ~g~ ~ >" - ~1 ~l ~ t~l ~ .~~ 01 "B .?: ~ ,~ :; '~ " ~ E ... '= :J::: 0 'l, ,,~ ~ 11.i '" ~ HilU o~~~::~ ~ i,ii~! =~e~~.9 ~ lit I. ~ .~ :- ~.'t: ~ Hill. ~t [) """ ~ ,:~ '" -0 i~ o ~ >.~ ~ ~~' "" ::::/...::: ~g ~~ -..:. c.. ~ ,'~ ~~ ~~ O..c it ~ .~ :~~ ~,~ " 'r. :/'. g 'Z .F- E c: ,g ... C:i: ;;;;l <L) o ...J U <L) Q " ~ 1 ,~ f & .l ~ ,,~l' ::: .....- a e ""0 tH l~: S~ ~11 I 1 ~:51 ~II~~ ~I ~l~1 51\ - t. _i\N - ] ;; "- ~ ~ a x f u .. ;.., s: < ^~ g ~y~ )0., i: 1:: "" ~e g~ ~~ ;;~ ~ ~ ~"" .: :: s ~~ ~ .;:J '" ... e % ~ :: ,a ~~ ~~ ~'& e~ ::.i'';K. -="'" ] .'~ ~ 3. " ~ ;.: :S ,~ '" . "" " '- .~'" :X ..;; o o NOIIV:JI'ddV :nIl1S0,:J L':tt':nIIS CONNIE ONE! Rezqfuing Agenda ' IteFll14 P9-g~1J Item #13 & 14 Connie One, L.L.c. Discontinuance, closure and abandonment of a portion of Connie Lane beginning on the east side of Connie Way To the west side of Baker Road Change of Zoning District Classification North side of Connie Lane, approximately 124.18 feet east of Connie Way and on the south side of Connie Lane at its Intersection with Baker Road District 4/District 2 Bayside/Kempsville April 11, 2006 REGULAR Barry Knight: Mr. Secretary, the next item to be heard? Joseph Strange: The next application is item 13 & 14, Connie One, L.L.C. An application of Connie One, L.L.c. for the discontinuance, closure and abandonment of a portion of Connie Lane beginning on the east side of Connie Way to the west side of Baker Road, and an application of Connie One, L.L.c. for a Change of Zoning District Classification from R-7.5 Residential District and I-I Light Industrial District to Conditional A-12 Apartment District on property located on the north side of Connie Lane, approximately 124.18 feet east of Connie Way and on the south side of Connie Lane at its intersection with Baker Road, District 4, Bayside, District 2, Kempsville with four proffers. Barry Knight: Welcome R.J. R.J. Nutter: Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, for the record, my name is R.J. Nutter representing the applicant Connie One. Maybe I can speed things up for you in that this was on your consent agenda earlier. It was pulled from consent because there was a gentleman inside the adjacent neighborhood, Mr. Kirk Lee. But he is known as Mr. Kirk, but he could not stay. We did meet with him, and I would relay the issues that he raised, and at the end of the presentation to him he said he had no objection to the application. But I did want to let you know a little bit about what his concerns were so you will understand how he felt about his obligation. He had really two principal questions. Could I go to the overall aerial? This is fine right here. Mr. Kirk lives right in this property right here (pointing to PowerPoint). We had met with the civic league, in this case the Newsome Farms Civic League on two occasions. Actually last summer and last fall. We made the presentation on the application, and the neighborhood had endorsed this plan that we presented to you. Since that time, a couple of months ago, the members of the Newsome Farms Civic League had heard that a church may own this property, and because the neighborhood had supported that church they wanted to make sure that this somehow was not undermining the church's position. So, we got to them and told them Item #13 & 14 Connie One, L.L.c. Page 2 that in fact that we actually purchased this property several years ago from the church. The church was no longer involved, and so that the plan we presented to them was the same plan that we were proposing today. He felt very comfortable with that position. The second question he had was that he wanted to make sure that we were closing all of Connie Lane. As you may know, staff recommended approval of that, but we went to the civic league meeting, or the association of the civic leagues, who this parcel belongs, I will tell you that the closure of that street is a much bigger significance to them then the technical closure which we often treat these things. The neighborhood was very concern that if Connie Lane, which the improvements end with this cul-de-sac, it is a paper street down to Baker Road. Their concern was that if this street were ever constructed or required by the ordinance that Connie Lane would be a through lane for people to avoid Baker Road, and go to this portion of Baker Road and cut right through the neighborhood and go through there. That was a huge concern to the residents. The reason why they had supported the church is because the church was going to build a building that was going to block that street, and they wanted to make sure that was going to continue to be the case. So, they know now. This closure will take place from Connie Way all the way down. We will not have access from this development onto Connie Lane, and while we're closing all of this portion, we will actually be conveying one half of the street to her. Actually it is being given to her, and in turn we will be building a new driveway so that her driveway will come right in here. It is slightly modified. But the owners of this property will be doing that in the course of their development so they were very, very happy with that. So, I promised Mr. Kirk that I would relay those concerns to you and let you readdress them. But otherwise, I think we come with staff recommendation and the civic association is in favor, as well as the North West Beach Partnership, which is the coalition that area. But, Mr. Knight, I will try to be brief, and end it right there. Barry Knight: We appreciate it. Are there any questions for Mr. Nutter? Okay. Thank you. Mr. Strange, just for the record, will you call the first speaker? Joseph Strange: Speaking in opposition we have Gary Galumbeck. Gary Galumbeck: I'm sorry. I beg your pardon. Barry Knight: Welcome sir. Gary Galumbeck: Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for hearing me. My name is Gary Galumbeck. I represent Charter Lakes Condominium Association. Weare actually sandwiched between this proposed development and Baker Road. Barry Knight: Would you use the pointer please sir? Gary Galumbeck: This is actually our spot here. Barry Knight: Okay. Item #13 & 14 Connie One, L.L.c. Page 3 Gary Galumbeck: Speaking for the association. A few years back when Baker Road extension was opened with the new development east of us, there was an increase in traffic, increase in noise, increase in crime. A lot of that carne down Baker Road from the Newpoint Community and the Lake Edwards community, which was represented here earlier when we were discussing. Our concerns are not only about the noise and the crime, and the traffic, but that the apartments are going to bring an unwanted element to our little community. We're very concerned. There is a lot of affordable housing in the area. There are vacancies in the apartments. There are condominiums and townhouses, as well as single-family homes all around our community that are vacant, and currently under construction. So, there is not a need for this community. Also, if you look, I believe that is the copy of the survey, off of page 5. We feel that this portion right here (pointing to PowerPoint) I believe to be exact is the southeast terminus of where Connie Lane intersects with Baker Road is actually our property. And by looking at the plat, there is a square portion that says, "is now or formerly owned by Providence Development Corporation." There is a driveway there that would be the entrance to this community. I believe it is our property. Barry Knight: Is there anything else? Gary Galumbeck: No sir. Barry Knight: Okay. Are there any questions? Gary Galumbeck: Yes ma'am? Kathy Katsias: These condominiums are for sale. They are between $200 - $300 thousand dollars. Gary Galumbeck: Yes ma' am. Some of them are on the lesser side. There are townhouses to the east of us actually just on the other side of Baker Road that are in the low hundreds. Kathy Katsias: That was not my understanding. I thought they were going to start at $200,000? Gary Galumbeck: You're talking about this new community? Kathy Katsias: Yes, this new development. Gary Galumbeck: I'm not aware of the pricing on that. Kathy Katsaias: Isn't that a street closure, so there is not going to be any access. Gary Galumbeck: If they close Connie the access would be from Baker Road. Item #13 & 14 Connie One, L.L.c. Page 4 Kathy Katsias: From Connie Lane. Right? Barry Knight: It's from Baker. Mr. Nutter is going to address that when he comes back. Okay. Ms. Anderson? Janice Anderson: So, this residential development behind your development, you are worried it is going to increase crime? Gary Galumbeck: Well, with apartments coming in, we feel it would bring noise, which would be a major concern, as well as excessive traffic. Janice Anderson: More than the industrial site behind you? Gary Galumbeck: Well, basically, it is vacant. It was used as a storage facility for automotive repair facility had been there for years and years. Janice Anderson: Okay. I thought it was active. Gary Galumbeck: No ma'am. Janice Anderson: Okay. I think these are for sale? Is that correct? Right. Gary Galumbeck: The apartments are not for sale. Janice Anderson: There are four units in each building, I believe, and I believe they are for sale. Like Ms. Katsias said, they are going to sell for $200 - 300 thousand dollars. Were you aware of that? Gary Galumbeck: No ma' am. We were told that there would be a mixture of rental units, as well as units for sale. Janice Anderson: Okay. My understanding about the application, and I'm sure Mr. Nutter will go over with you. It is one type of product that they're proposing right now. Gary Galumbeck: Okay. Janice Anderson: Okay? Gary Galumbeck: Thank you for clearing that up. Barry Knight: Are there any other questions? Thank you sir. Gary Galumbeck: Thank you. Item #13 & 14 Connie One, L.L.c. Page 5 Joseph Strange: There are no other speakers. Barry Knight: Mr. Nutter? You've heard a couple of questions? RJ. Nutter: Yes, I sure have. Let me try to address them for you. First, this is not an apartment complex. Maybe he is confused with the "A" designation for the zoning characterization. But, these are condominiums. They are for sale units. We anticipate their price being between $200 - $300 thousand dollars, which is right in line. We checked with the housing prices of the units around us and they are right in line with those, and as far as access, and what we did do, and as I told you. It is a major concern to the civic association in the area not to have Connie Lane extended, and so we have not provided access for our property by Connie Lane. Our access way will be here (pointing to PowerPoint) off of Baker Road. The reason why this application took so long to get to you quite frankly, and remember I told you that we met with the civic association during the late summer and fall of last year, was because of the enormous amount of issues we had to face and get approval from all of the properties to make sure. There were a small series of rental properties. I can tell you that we filed certificates with the City Treasurer's office indicating that we own all of the property in the confines of this area, or have it under contract. So, the access way that you see here, we just indicated, and we believe frankly that this complex that is in here, which is very nice as well, quite frankly, this area is in very serious problem. Those who of you went on the van trip know that very well. There is actually people living there, in the school buses. A gentleman has been living in a school bus for 17 years. This property owner, my client had to locate and purchased a mobile home to get them out of this property. There is a small business there. It does continue to operate. You may not see it as much but the residents of Newsome Farms see it everyday. They don't like it very much. So, we feel we are bringing in some substantial improvement to the property. I'm happy to tell you that the possible reception of the people behind the junkyard, we think it is pretty much unanimous. So, we would as for your endorsement. It is a very nice product. It is keeping with the area. They are for sale units as we indicated. Barry Knight: Thank you. Are there any questions for Mr. Nutter? Okay. Okay, Mr. Bayside and Mr. Kempsville? It is in your districts. What's your pleasure? Henry Livas: I would move that we approve it. Barry Knight: Okay. David Redmond: I'll second it. Barry Knight: Okay. There is a motion on the table to approve agenda item 13 & 14. A motion made by Henry Livas and seconded by David Redmond. Is there any discussion? Mr. Redmond? Item #13 & 14 Connie One, L.L.c. Page 6 David Redmond: I just want to make the point. I think the one speaker that was verbal mentioned the amount of new development in this neck of our woods. This is part of our city that has not always enjoyed the greatest fortune, in some ways. There has however, in recent years, I think, has been a real refreshing interest and improvement in housing stock. In this case, there is only what can be described, in my view as ajunkyard on the site. And, this project promises, not only to eliminate that, but to continue to contribute, I think to improving the housing stock in this part of Virginia Beach. Not only would I not want to get in the way of that, I would actively encourage it to the greatest extent that we can. When you drive up and down there, it is making a real difference in the appearance of that neighborhood, and ultimately it is going to make a real difference in retail, in the office, and all of the things that give any community life. So, I wholeheartedly support this application. I think it is unquestionably an improvement. And, I look forward to supporting it. Barry Knight: Thank you Mr. Redmond. Is there any other discussion? There is a motion on the floor. We'll call for the question. AYE 9 NAY 0 ABSO ANDERSON AYE BERNAS AYE CRABTREE AYE HENLEY HORSLEY AYE KA TSIAS AYE KNIGHT AYE LIV AS AYE REDMOND AYE STRANGE AYE WOOD ABSENT 2 ABSENT ABSENT Ed Weeden: By a vote of 9-0, the Board has approved the applications of Connie One, L.L.C. Barry Knight: Thank you. CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE In Reply Refer To Our File No. DF-6572 DATE: May 9,2007 FROM: Leslie L. LiUey, ~ B. Kay WiISO~ DEPT: City Attorney DEPT: City Attorney TO: RE: Conditional Zoning Application: Connie One, LLC The above-referenced conditional zoning application is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on May 22, 2007. I have reviewed the subject proffer agreement, dated January 17, 2007 and have determined it to be legally sufficient and in proper legal form. A copy of the agreement is attached. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter further. BKW/als Enclosure cc: Kathleen Hassen Prepared BylReturn To: Troutman Sanders LLP 222 Central Park A venue, Suite 2000 Virginia Beach, Virginia ~3462 AGREE:MENT THIS AGREE:MENT (the "Agreement") is made as of this 17th day of January, 2007 by and between CONNIE ONE. L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company (the "Grantor"), the current owner of that certain property located along Connie Lane, in Virginia Beach, Virginia, which property is more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (the "Property") and the CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia (hereinafter referred to as "Grantee"). WIT N E SSE T H: WHEREAS, the Grantor has initiated an amendment to the Zoning Map of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, by petition addressed to the Grantee, so as to change the classification of the property from R-7.5 and I-I to Conditional A-12; and WHEREAS, the Grantee's policy is to provide only for the orderly development of land for residential purposes, through zoning and other land development legislation; and WHEREAS, the Grantor acknowledges that the competing and sometimes incompatible uses conflict, and that in order to permit differing uses on and in the area of the subject Property and at the same time to recognize the effects of the change and the need for various types of uses, certain reasonable conditions governing the use of the Property for the protection of the community that are not generally applicable to land similarly zoned A-12 are needed to cope with the situation to which the Grantor's rezoning application gives rise; and WHEREAS, the Grantor has voluntarily proffered in writing in advance of and prior to the public hearing before the Grantee, as part of the proposed conditional amendment to the Zoning Map, in addition to the regulations provided for in the existing A-12 districts by the existing City's Zoning Ordinance (CZO), the following reasonable conditions related to the physical development, operation and use of the Property to be adopted as a part of said amendment to the new Zoning Map relative to the Property, all of which have a reasonable relation to the rezoning and the need for which is generated by the rezoning; and GPINs: 1468-50-7212; 1468-50-5086; 1468-50-3176 WHEREAS, said conditions having been proffered by the Grantor and allowed and accepted by the Grantee as part of the amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, such conditions shall continue in full force and effect until a subsequent amendment changes the zoning on the Property covered by such conditions; provided, however, that such conditions shall continue despite a subsequent amendment if the subsequent amendment is part of the comprehensive implementation of a new or substantially revised zoning ordinance, unless, notwithstanding the foregoing, these conditions are amended or varied by written instrument recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia and executed by the record owner of the subject Property at the time of recordation of such instrument; provided, further, that said instrument is consented to by the Grantee in writing as evidenced by a certified copy of ordinance or resolution adopted by the governing body of the Grantee, after a public hearing before the Grantee advertised pursuant to the provisions of the Code of Virginia, Section 15.2- 2204, which said ordinance or resolution shall be recorded along with said instrument as conclusive evidence of such consent. NOW THEREFORE, the Grantor, for itself, it's successors, assigns, grantees, and other successors in title or interest, voluntarily and without any requirement by or exaction from the Grantee or its governing body and without any element of compulsion of quid pro quO for zoning, rezoning, site plan, building permit or subdivision approval, hereby make the following declaration of conditions and restrictions which shall restrict and govern the physical development, operation and use of the Property and hereby covenant and agree that these proffers (collectively, the '"Proffers") shall constitute covenants running with the said Property, which shall be binding upon the Property and upon all parties and persons claiming under or through the Grantor, it's heirs, personal representatives, assigns, grantees and other successors in interest or title, namely: 1. When developed, the Property shall be developed in substantial conformance with the exhibit titled "Connie Manor Preliminary Site Plan", dated 11/3012006, and prepared by the Spectra Group, Inc., a copy of which has been exhibited to the City Council and is on file with City Planning Department (the '"Conceptual Plan"). Page 2 2. When developed, Grantor shall install landscaping and a fence, each in accordance with the Category IV requirements of the City's Landscape Guide, along the northwestern boundary of the Property north of Connie Lane, as shown on the Conceptual Plan. 3. When developed, the residential buildings constructed on the Property shall be constructed in substantial conformance with the building elevations titled "Connie Manor Building Elevation I" and "Connie Manor Building Elevation II", which elevations have been exhibited to the City Council and are on file in the Planning Department of the City of Virginia Beach (the "Elevations"). A. Further conditions lawfully imposed by applicable development ordinances may be required by the Grantee during detailed site plan and/or subdivision review and administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements. All references hereinabove to zoning districts and to regulations applicable thereto, refer to the City Zoning Ordinance of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in force as of the date the conditional zoning amendment is approved by the Grantee. The Grantor covenants and agrees that (1) the Zoning Administrator of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia shall be vested with all necessary authority on behalf of the governing body of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia to administer and enforce the foregoing conditions, including (i) the ordering in writing of the remedying of any noncompliance with such conditions, and (ii) the bringing of legal action or suit to ensure compliance with such conditions, including mandatory or prohibitory injunction, abatement, damages or other appropriate action, suit or proceedings; (2) the failure to meet all conditions shall constitute cause to deny the issuance of any of the required building or occupancy permits as may be appropriate; (3) if aggrieved by any decision of the Zoning Administrator made pursuant to the provisions of the City Code, the CZO or this Agreement, the Grantor shall petition the governing body for the review thereof prior to instituting proceedings in court; and (4) the Zoning Map shall show by an appropriate symbol on the map the existence of conditions attaching to the zoning of the subject Property on the map and that the ordinance and the conditions may be made readily available and accessible for public inspection in the office of the Zoning Administrator and in the Planning Page 3 Department and that they shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia and indexed in the name of the Grantor and Grantee. [Remainder of Page Left Intentionally Blank; Signature Page Follows] IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned Grantor executes this Agreement as of the date first written above. GRANTOR: CONNIE ONE, L.L.C., a Virginia limit liability company By: Name: l.Y\ . ~ Woe.&.. Title: ~"'(A.~;~ ~~w COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to-wit: The foregoing ins~ent ~a~ acJG.owledged before me this 11-t'Y\ day of ')AJ~ , 200~ by C ""('IS W' QvcY , in his/her capacity as managing member of CONNIE ONE, L.L.c., a Virginia limited liability company, on behalf of the company. My Commission Expires: ~W~~/ Notary Public OaD&:l-- 3 ( 2J:J L () J 320550 Page 4 Exhibit A PARCEL ONE: ALL THAT certain lot, piece or parcel of land, lying, situate and being in the Bayside Borough of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and known as Lot 28 of Newsome Farm, on the plat recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Deed Book 59 at page 48, and bounded and described as follows: Beginning at a point in the west side of Connie Lane separating the property herein described from that now or formerly of W.e. Johnson; thence S. 36 degrees 58' W 250.83 feet to a pin; thence S. 69 degrees 26'10" E 734.57 feet to a pin; thence N. 26 degrees 53' E 44.06 feet to a pin in the western side of Connie Lane, thence along the western side of Connie Lane N 53 degrees 02' W 697.05 feet to the point of beginning. For a more particular description of said property, reference is made to plat entitled, "Survey of Tract No. 28 Plat of Newsome Farm, Property of Jerry Poole Est." made by Chewning, Goodwin and Hoggard, dated June 21, 1967. Less and except that portion conveyed to Tidewater Industries, Inc., a Virginia corporation, in Deed Book 1059, at page 90. Less and except that portion conveyed to City of Virginia Beach in Deed Book 2810, at page 2157. IT BEING the same property conveyed to Charles W. Hutchinson, Jr. and Virginia W. Hutchinson and Charles W. Hutchinson, Jr. by deed from Louise E. Baker, widow dated March 14,1968 and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia in Deed Book 1049, at page 272. Virginia W. Hutchinson died testate on July 3, 1987 and by operation oflaw property passed to Charles W. Hutchinson, Jr., her husband. PARCEL TWO: ALL THA T certain lot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings and improvements thereon, situate, lying and being in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, known, numbered and designated as Parcel "A", Tidewater Industries, as shown on that certain plat entitled, "subdivision of number 28, plat of Newsome Farm, for e.w. and V.W. Hutchinson, Bayside Borough - Virginia Beach, Virginia, 11 April 1968, Scale: 1" = 100', Freeman and Johnson, Engineers and Surveyors," which said plat is to be duly recorde d in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia in Deed Book 1059, at page 92. Less and except that portion conveyed to City of Virginia Beach in Deed Book 2810, at page 2152. Page 5 Less and except that portion conveyed to City of Virginia Beach in Deed Book 3707, at page 1366. IT BEING the same property conveyed to Tidewater Industries, Inc. by deed from Charles W. Hutchinson, Jr. and Virginia W. Hutchinson, dated April 24, 1968 and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia in Deed Book 1059, at page 90. PARCEL THREE: ALL THAT certain lot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings and improvements thereon, situate, lying and being in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, near Davis Corner, and described on a certain plat of survey entitled, "Property of David R. Copeland, located near Davis Corner, Princess Anne County, Virginia," made by W.E. Gallup, County Surveyor, dated September 22, 1953, and duly recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia in Deed Book 340, at page 471, and being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a pin on the northern side of Newsome Farm Road, which pin is S. 53 degrees 02' E 473 feet from the northeastern corner of Newsome Farm Road and a 15 foot road designated as B Road, and from said point of beginning running thence N 36 degrees 00' E 209 feet to a pin; thence turning and running S. 53 degrees 02' E 417 feet to a pin; thence turning and running S. 36 degrees 00' W 209 feet to a pin in the northern line of Newsome Road; thence turning and running along the northern side of Newsome Farm Road N 53 degrees 02' W 417 feet to the point of beginning. LESS AND EXCEPT that portion of the property, being 3234 sq. ft., which was conveyed to the City of Virginia Beach for road widening as recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 2750 at page 1941, and as shown on the plat recorded in Deed Book 2720, at page 383. Page 6 M. APPOINTMENTS OPEN SPACE ADVISORY COMMITTEE N. UNFINISHED BUSINESS O. NEW BUSINESS P. ADJOURNMENT CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTIONS - V 0 I DATE: May 15.2007 M B L D C E L E D H C R A W PAGE: I S I E J L N U N I T E D N 0 A D H U L W AGENDA E Z Y L N N 0 R E S 0 ITEM # SUBJECT MOTION VOTE P E E E E A R I V 0 0 H L R Y S N F N A N D I CITY COUNCIL BRIEFING GREEN RIBBON COMMmEE Charles Meyer. Chief Operating Officer Peter Schmidt, Co-Chair IIIIII/ SPECIAL FORMAL SESSION 6:10 PM IVN E CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION CER TIFlED 10-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y A Y Y B S T A I N E D F-I MINUTES - May 8. 2007 APPROVED 11-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y GlH-1 PUBLIC HEARING I Speaker opposed TOWN CENTER SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT Modification of Boundaries I/J-I Ordinances re FY 2007-2008 BIENNIAL ADOPTED 9-2 N Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y Y RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN (Operating Budget): a. APPROPRIATED, AS AMENDED, FY July 1,2007- June 30, 2008, $1,721,976,371 for Operations/$621,483,SOI in Interfund Transfers b. ESTABLISHED tax levy on real estate for FY 2008 at $0.89 c. ESTABLISHED the tax levy on personal property/ machinery/tools for calendar year 2008 d. AUTHORIZED Annual Funding Plan to HUD e. AMENDED ~~35-64/35-67 of City Code re exemption/ deferral of real estate taxes for elderly or disabled persons CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTIONS - V 0 I DATE: May 15,2007 M B L 0 C E L E 0 H C R A W PAGE: 2 S I E J L N U N I T E 0 N 0 A 0 H U L W AGENDA E Z Y L N N 0 R E S 0 ITEM # SUBJECT MOTION VOTE P E E E E A R I V 0 0 H L R Y S N F N A N 0 f. DECLARED $8,750,000 within Sand bridge TIF as Surplus g. AMENDED funding sources for ARP reducing the amount to $0.009 h. RE-ESTABLISHED Red Light Photo Enforcement ProgramJAPPROPRIA TED $305.000 to Police I. AMENDED Ordinance to create the Town Center Special Service District modifying boundaries j. AMENDED ~1-12.2 of City Code re Courthouse Security Fee 2 Ordinances re FY 2007-2008 BIENNIAL ADOPTED 9-2 N Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y y Y CAPITAL BUDGET: a. APPROPRIATED $204,514.641 for FY-2008 Capital Budget re FY- 2008/FY-2012 CIP b. AUTHORIZED issuance of General Obligation Bonds of $63,800,000 c. AUTHORIZED issuance of Water/Sewer Revenue Bonds of$18,793,000 d. REALLOCATED $46,650,692/DIRECTED Public Works to work with VDOT to advance Nimmo Parkway Phase-V-AI (Ferrell- Phase II) Princess Anne Road-Phase IV 3 Ordinance re retroactive Employment ADOPTED 9-2 N Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y Y Agreement with the City Manager December L 2006 - November 30, 2009 ADD Ordinance to AMEND Section 33-125 of the ADDED/ ON City Code re newsracks in the Resort Area. ADOPTED K/LIM ADJOURNMENT 8:22 PM CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTIONS - V 0 I DATE: May 15.2007 M B L D C E L E D H C R A W PAGE: 3 S I E J L N U N I T E D N 0 A D H U L W AGENDA E Z Y L N N 0 R E S 0 ITEM # SUBJECT MOTION VOTE P E E E E A R I V 0 0 H L R Y S N F N A N D CITYWIDE TOWN MEETING SCHEDULE Tuesday, June 19 -7:15 P.M. - Virginia Beach Convention Center Shaping our Community and Ourselves to Protect our Waterways Tuesday, September 18 - Time and Location to be Announced FY 2008-2010 Budget Tuesday, November 20 -7:15 P.M. - Green Run Homeowners Association Building Stormwater Plans and Funding