HomeMy WebLinkAboutJUNE 26, 2007 AGENDA
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
"COMMUNITY FOR A LIFETIME"
CITY COUNCIL
MAYOR MEYERA E. OBERNDORF. At-Large
VICE MAYOR roUIS R. JONES. Bayside - District 4
WIllIAM R. DeSTEPH. At-Large
HARRY E. DlEZEL. Kempsville - District 2
ROBERT M. DYER.. Centerville - District J
BARBARA M. HENLEY. Princess Anne - District 7
REBA S. McCLANAN. Rose Hall- District 3
JOHN E. UHRIN. Beach - District 6
RON A. VILLANUEVA. At-Large
ROSEMARY WILSON. At-Large
JAMES L. WOOD. Lynnhaven -District 5
CITY HALL BUILDING
2401 COURTHOUSE DRiVE
VIRGIN BEACH, VIRGINIA 234568005
PHONE:(757) 385-4303
FAX (757) 385-5669
E-MAIL: Ctycncl@Vbgov.com
CITY COUNCIL BRIEFING - Conference Room - I
A. VIRGINIA BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (V6CDC)-
Annual Activity Report r
Andy Friedman, Director, Department of Housing and Neighborhood prelervation
Mary Kay Horoszewski, Executive Director
I
I
I
I
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
CIIT MANAGER - JAMES K. SPORE
CJIT ATTORNEY - LESliE L. liUEY
CIIT CLERK - RUTH HODGES FRASER. MMC
26 JUNE 2007
I.
II.
CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFINGS
A. WATER QUALITY BUFFER
Clay Bernick, Environmental Management Administrator - Planning
B. HEALTHCARE
James K. Spore, City Manager
III. CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS
IV. REVIEW OF AGENDA
1:00 PM
V. INFORMAL SESSION
- Conference Room -
3:30 PM
A. CALL TO ORDER - Vice Mayor Louis R. Jones, Presiding
B. ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL
C. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION
VI. FORMAL SESSION
- Council Chamber -
6:00 PM
A. CALL TO ORDER - Mayor Meyera E. Obemdorf
B.
INVOCATION:
Reverend Dan B. Goff, DD
Pastor, Calvary Assembly of God
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
June 12, 2007
G. AGENDA FOR FORMAL SESSION
H. MAYOR'S PRESENTATION - Vice Mayor Louis R. Jones
1. ACHIEVEMENT for EXCELLENCE in FINANCIAL REPORTING
Government Finance Officers Association
Patricia A. Phillips - Director - Finance
I. CONSENT AGENDA
J. RESOLUTIONS/ORDINANCES
1. Resolution re a REGIONAL CONSENT ORDER dealing with sanit~ ry sewer overflows
2. Resolution to EXTEND to January 1, 2008, the suspension of increase:) in health insurance
premiums for Retirees
3. Ordinances to ADD, AMEND, REPEAL and/or REORDAlN the Citv Code to reflect
provisions of the State Code as adopted by the 2007 General Assembl):
a. ~~ 6-122 - 6-122.3 re administration of breath or blood tests from 'within two hours to
within three hours of boating under the influence
b. ~~2-462 and 2-464 re Sheriff being designated as the State mandat d High Constable
c. ~~21-303, 21-307, 21-312 re State Inspection Decals and other pa king prohibitions
d. ~~23-22.1 and 23-22.2 re drinking alcoholic beverages in, and dehnition of, "public
places"
e. ~23-43.1 re disruptive passengers on public transportation const tuting Class 4
Misdemeanor and defining "public transportation service"
f. ~38-2.1 re requiring fingerprinting for new concealed weapon pe mits only
4. Ordinances re Beaches and Waterways Advisory Commission
a. AMEND and REORDAlN ~6-162 of the City Code re terms ofnembers
b. AMEND by-laws re removal of staggered terms
5. Ordinance to AUTHORIZE execution of a Deed of Release and Exc lange re an Agricultural
Lands Preservation (ARP) easement for GEORGE B., JR. and JUANITA F.
PENDLETON re a three acre building site at Indian Creek Road nero Baum Road
DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE
6. Ordinances to AUTHORIZE temporary encroachments into portior s of City property by
DAVID F. and JERRY A. HARRIS to remove an existing float, ramp and pier to construct
the same and repair the pier at 700 Kennedy Avenue in Lake Rudee DISTRICT 6 - BEACH
7. Annual PERMIT RENEWAL for area private and non-profit EMS Jrganizations:
American Lifeline Medical Transport
Children's Hospital of the King's Daughters
Eastern Shore Ambulance
Life EV AC of Virginia Medical Transport
Lifeline Ambulance Service, Inc.
Medical Transport
Nightingale Regional Air Ambulance
Network Medical Systems
8. Ordinanc:e to APPOINT the Directors of Parks and Recreation, Planning and Public Works as
Viewers for one-year terms beginning July 1,2007, re closures of City streets and alleys.
9. Ordinances to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE grant funds from the Virginia Department of
Transportation (VDOT) to ESTABLISH new Capital Improvement Programs (CIP), Bicycle
and Ped,estrian Safety, re installation of pedestrian signs and flashing lights:
a. $63,450 for P ACIFIC AVENUE between 5rh and 43rd streets
b. $36,288 for SHORE DRIVE between Kendall Street and Vista Circle
Ordinances to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE:
c. $322:,999 from the State Compensation Board and $235,479 from the Sheriff's Special
Revenue Fund to his budget re pay increases for uniformed personnel
d. $300,000 in earned revenue from admissions and store sales to the Virginia Aquarium
Special Revenue Fund
e. $29,983 from Eagle Cove Subdivision re Cash-in-Lieu-of-Park Reservation-Payment for
park improvement within the Indian RiverlElbow Road corridor
f. $16,802 from the Virginia Tobacco Settlement Foundation re "Too Good For Drugs"
(TGFD) program to be administered by Parks and Recreation
g. $2,426 from the American Cancer Society to compensate Hampton Roads Transit (HRT) re
shuttle service for the Relay for Life fundraiser
K. PLANNING
1. Applications at 1763 Princess Anne Road DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE
a. HAC PROPERTIES, LLC, re Modification of Proffer No 3 to allow low speed motor
vehicle sales, and future retail establishments, laboratories for the production and repair of
eye glasses, hearing aids and prosthetic devices (approved on June 22, 2004)
RECOMMENDATION
APPROVAL
b. NORMA DIANE PAYNE HEWIT tJa ARGO OF TIDEWATER for a Conditional
,Use Permit re sale of low speed vehicles at 1763 Princess Anne Road
RECOMMENDATION
APPROVAL
2. Application of CAVALIER GOLF & YACHT CLUB for a Conditional Use Permit re a
golf club Agronomy facility at Kamichi Court. DISTRICT 5 - L YNNHA VEN
RECOMMENDATION
APPLICANT REQUESTS DEFERRAL TO JULY 10, 2007
APPROVAL
3. Application of SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION, L.L.C. for a Chanf!e of
Zoninf! District Classification from R-5D and R-1 0 Residential Distric s 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, Prin~ess Anne Road and
1632 Salem Road, "Spence Farm," re 103 single-family dwellings, 34" townhomes, and 230
twin townhomes and Senior Housing ("Renaissance Park") DISTRICl 1- CENTERVILLE
and DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE
DEFERRED MAY 22, & JUNE 26, 2007
RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL WITH CONDITION
L. APPOINTNUENTS
BIKEWAYS AND TRAILS
HUMAN RIGHTS
OPEN SPACE ADVISORY COMMISSION
REVIEW AND ALLOCATION COMMITTEE - COG
M. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
N. NEW BUSINESS
O. ADJOURNMENT
CITYWIDE TOWN NUEETINGS
September 18
Time and Location to be Announced
FY 2008-201 0 Budget
November 20
Green Run Homeowners Association Building-7:15 pm
Stormwater Plans and Funding
CITY COUNCIL SUMMER SCHEDULE
July 3
July 10
July 17
Cancelled
Briefings, Informal, Formal, including Planning items
Briefmgs, Informal, Formal, including Planning items
August 7
Cancelled
August 14
August 21
August 28
Briefmgs, Informal, Formal, including Planning items
Briefings, Informal, Formal
Briefmgs, Informal, Formal, including Planning items
*********
If you are physically disabled or visually impaired
and need assistance at this meeting,
please call the CITY CLERK'S OFFICE at 385-4303
***********
Agenda 6/26/075t
www.vbgov.com
I. CITY COUNCIL BRIEFING - Conference Room - I
I
I
i
A. VIRGINIA BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORA nON (VBCDC)-
Annual Activity Report
Andy Friedman, Director, Department of Housing and Neighborhood Preservation
Mary Kay Horoszewski, Executive Director
1:00 PM
II. CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFINGS
A. WATER QUALITY BUFFER
Clay Bernick, Environmental Management Administrator - Planning
B. HEALTHCARE
James K. Spore, City Manager
III. CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS
IV. REVIEW OF AGENDA
v. INFORMAL SESSION - Conference Room-
A. CALL TO ORDER - Vice Mayor Louis R. Jones, Presiding
3:30 PM
B. ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL
c. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION
VI. FORMAL SESSION
- Council Chamber -
6:00 PM
A. CALL TO ORDER - Mayor Meyera E. Obemdorf
B.
INVOCATION:
Reverend Dan B. Goff, DD
Pastor, Calvary Assembly of God
I
C. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STtTES OF AMERICA
D. ELECTRONIC ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL
E. CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION
F. MINUTES
1. INFORMAL and FORMAL SESSIONS
June 12, 2007
G. AGENDA FOR FORMAL SESSION
.tsnlutinn
CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION
VIRGINIA BEACH CITY COUNCIL
WHEREAS: The Virginia Beach City Council convened into CLOSED SESSION,
pursuant to the afl[irmative 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.
I
H. MAYOR'S PRESENTATION - Vice Mayor Louis R. Jones
1. ACHIEVEMENT for EXCELLENCE in FINANCIAL REPORTING
Government Finance Officers Association
Patricia A. Phillips - Director - Finance
1. CONSENT AGENDA
J. RESOLUTIONS/ORDINANCES
1. Resolution re a REGIONAL CONSENT ORDER dealing with sanitary sewer overflows
2. Resolution to EXTEND to January 1, 2008, the suspension of increases in health insurance
premiums for Retirees
3. Ordinances to ADD, AMEND, REPEAL and/or REORDAIN the City Code to reflect
provisions of the State Code as adopted by the 2007 General Assembly:
a. ~~ 6-122 - 6-122.3 re administration of breath or blood tests from within two hours to
within three hours of boating under the influence
b. ~~2-462 and 2-464 re Sheriff being designated as the State mandated High Constable
c. ~~21-303, 21-307, 21-312 re State Inspection Decals and other parking prohibitions
d. ~~23-22.1 and 23-22.2 re drinking alcoholic beverages in, and defInition of, "public
places"
e. ~23-43.1 re disruptive passengers on public transportation constituting Class 4
Misdemeanor and defIning "public transportation service"
f. ~38-2.1 re requiring fingerprinting for new concealed weapon permits only
4. Ordinances re Beaches and Waterways Advisory Commission
a. AMEND and REORDAIN ~6-162 of the City Code re terms of members
b. AMEND by-laws re removal of staggered terms
5. Ordinance to AUTHORIZE execution of a Deed of Release and Exchange re an Agricultural
Lands Preservation (ARP) easement for GEORGE B., JR. and JUANITA F.
PENDLETON re a three acre building site at Indian Creek Road near Baum Road
DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE
6. Ordinances to AUTHORIZE temporary encroachments into portions of City property by
DAVID F. and JERRY A. HARRIS to remove an existing float, ramp and pier to construct
the same and repair the pier at 700 Kennedy Avenue in Lake Rudee DISTRICT 6 - BEACH
7. Annual PERMIT RENEWAL for area private and non-profit EMS organizations:
American Lifeline Medical Transport
Children's Hospital of the King's Daughters
Eastern Shore Ambulance
Life EV AC of Virginia Medical Transport
Lifeline Ambulance Service, Inc.
Medical. Transport
Nightingale Regional Air Ambulance
N€~twork Medical Systems
8. Ordinance to APPOINT the Directors of Parks and Recreation, Planning and Public Works as
Viewers iur one-year terms beginning July 1, 2007, re closures of City streets and alleys.
9. Ordinances to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE grant funds from the Virginia Department of
Transportation (VDOT) to ESTABLISH new Capital Improvement Programs (CIP), Bicycle
and Pedestrian Safety, re installation of pedestrian signs and flashing lights:
a. $63,450 for PACIFIC AVENUE between 5rh and 43rd streets
b. $36,288 for SHORE DRIVE between Kendall Street and Vista Circle
Ordinances to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE:
c. $322,999 from the State Compensation Board and $235,479 from the Sheriff's Special
Revenue Fund to his budget re pay increases for uniformed personnel
d. $300,000 in earned revenue from admissions and store sales to the Virginia Aquarium
Special Revenue Fund
e. $29,983 from Eagle Cove Subdivision re Cash-in-Lieu-of-Park Reservation-Payment for
park improvement within the Indian River/E1bow Road corridor
f. $16,802 from the Virginia Tobacco Settlement Foundation re "Too Good For Drugs"
(TGFJD) program to be administered by Parks and Recreation
g. $2,426 from the American Cancer Society to compensate Hampton Roads Transit (HRT) re
shuttle;: service for the Relay for Life fundraiser
&~~
Kr~:~"',.~: /\j~,
. . h. . f.,
\~_. I!j.>
-.; .~..
~'o,. ",-".,;:0.
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: A Resolution Approving a Regional Consent Order Package Pertaining to Sanitary Sewer
Overflows
MEETING DATE: June 26,2007
. Background: In 2005, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) informed the Hampton Roads Sanitation District
(HRSD) and its constituent localities that they would be placed under a Regional Consent Order,
as part of a nationwide effort under the Clean Water Act (CWA) to reduce and control sanitary
sewer overflows (SSO's).. HRSD and the localities have been negotiating with DEQ, in
consultation with EPA, and have reached agreement on the terms and conditions of the Consent
Order. The Consent Order, including the technical standards, will then be placed before the State
Water Control Board for approval, probably at its September meeting.
HRSD, Hampton Roads Planning District Commission (HRPDC) and the localities have also
agreed upon the terms of a Memorandum of Agreement for the purpose, among others, of
defining their respective roles, responsibilities, and obligations.
Public Utilities is requesting City Council approval for the City Manager to execute the Consent
Order, including the technical standards in it, and the MOA.
. Considerations: All SSO's are prohibited under the CWA, but cannot be totally avoided.
All large wastewater collection systems experience them, especially during heavy rainfall events,
notwithstanding measures taken to avoid them. This is particularly true of systems with aging
sewer infrastructure, and located in low-lying, flood-prone areas with high water tables. The
object of the Consent Order is to ensure that local sanitary sewer systems take the corrective
actions necessary to minimize SSO's to the maximum extent practicable. By entering into and
thereafter complying with the Consent Order, the City (as well as the other localities) will greatly
reduce its exposure to penalties for past and future SSO's, avoid judicial action by EPA and DEQ,
or both, and protect the City from third-party lawsuits.
The Consent Order will require higher sanitary sewer service charges in the future. However,
Public Utilities is not seeking increased service charges beyond those already approved by City
Council for FY 2008 through 2010. Rate increases will be necessary for FY 2011 and beyond.
The Consent Order will require changes to the City Code to insure the maintenance of grease
traps by restaurants, grocery stores, and other non-residential generators of fats, oils and grease
(FOG). Code changes will also be necessary to mandate repairs to reduce private-side infiltration
and inflow. Public Utilities will submit those changes for consideration later this year.
The attached policy report and Summary of Material terms provide more detail and information
concerning the Consent Order.
· Public Inlformation: This agenda item has been the subject of two previous briefings to
City Council and was advertised as part of the normal agenda process. Future requests for rate
increases or COdE~ changes would be advertised at the time they are brought to the City Council.
· Alternatives: There are two alternatives - authorize execution of the Consent Order, or
reject it. Any municipality that does not join the Consent Order will be subject to legal action for
violations of the CWA. The Department of Justice, EPA and/or DEQ may seek fines for past and
future SSO's, and injunctive orders mandating the same obligations (or more) that are in the
Consent Order. The course of action prescribed by the Consent Order will reduce SSO's, protect
the City's residents, protect the environment, and protect the City from fines and third-party
lawsuits.
· Recommendations: Authorize execution of the Regional Special Order by Consent.
· Attachments: Resolution, Policy Report and Summary of Material Terms
Recommended Action: Approval of Regional Consent Order Package
Submitting DeparlmentJAgency: Public Utilities () "" ~~ I'.!.
City Manager:~ lL, CG~
1 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A REGIONAL
2 CONSENT ORDER PACKAGE PERTAINING
3 TO SANITARY SEWER OVERFLOWS
4
5 WHEREAS, the Hampton Roads Sanitation District ("HRSD") provides sewage
6 treatment service for the cities of Chesapeake, Hampton, Newport News, Poquoson,
7 Portsmouth, Suffolk, Virginia Beach, and Williamsburg; the counties of Gloucester, Isle
8 of Wight, and York; the James City County Service Authority; and the town of Smithfield.
9 (collectively, the "Localities"); and
10
11 WHEREAS, the City of Virginia Beach and other localities individually own and
12 operate sanitary sewer collection systems in their own jurisdictions, which systems
13 collect sewage that is delivered to the HRSD system for treatment; and
14
15 WHEREAS, due to pipe breaks, electrical outages, wet weather events,
16 insufficient capacity in the collection, interceptor and treatment systems, and other
17 factors, untreated sewage is, on occasion, discharged from various locations in the
18 HRSD sewer system and from the Localities' sanitary sewer systems; and
19
20 WHEREAS, at the behest of the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
21 ("DEQ") and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA"), HRSD and the
22 Localities, working under the aegis of the Hampton Roads Planning District Commission
23 ("HRPDC"), have expeditiously developed a comprehensive program to remedy these
24 problems; and
25
26 WHEREAS, the aforesaid program consists of a regional element, which requires
27 the Localities and HRSD to use uniform standards to design the infrastructure
28 improvements needed to manage peak wet weather flows throughout the Hampton
29 Roads Sewer System in a cost-effective manner, and an individual element, which
30 requires HRSD and the Localities to address their individual system conditions that
31 cause or contribute to discharges of untreated sewage; and
32
33 WHEREAS, these regional and individual commitments are set forth in the
34 following three documents that have been developed in consultation with the staff of the
35 DEQ (collectively, the "Regional Consent Order Package"):
36
37 (1) State Water Control Board Enforcement Action: Special Order by
38 Consent Issued by the DEQ to the Hampton Roads Sanitation
39 District; the Cities of Chesapeake, Hampton, Newport News,
40 Poquoson, Portsmouth, Suffolk, Virginia Beach and Williamsburg;
41 the Counties of Gloucester, Isle of Wight and York; the James City
42 County Service Authority; and the Town of Smithfield ("Regional
43 Consent Order");
44
45 (2) Attachment 1 to the Special Order by Consent: Regional Technical
46 Standards ("Regional Technical Standards"); and
47
48 (3) Memorandum of Agreement for Regional Sanitary Sewer System
49 Operation, Maintenance and Enhancement ("Memorandum of
50 Agreement")
51
52 WHEREAS, the success of these initiatives depends upon the cooperative efforts
53 of HRSD and the Localities, and the approval of the Virginia State Water Control Board
54 ("SWCB") and the DEQ; and
55
56 WHEREAS, the ongoing efforts of the Localities and HRSD to maintain, repair
57 and improve thE~ sanitary sewer system at substantial cost, for the benefit of the region's
58 quality of life, is endorsed and commended;
59
60 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
61 OF VIRGINIA BEACH:
62
63 1. That, subject to the provisions of Paragraph (3) below, the City Council
64 hereby approves the Regional Consent Order Package, including the Special Order by
65 Consent and R.egional Technical Standards, and the Memorandum of Agreement for
66 Regional Sanitary Sewer System Operation, Maintenance and Enhancement, the
67 material terms of which are attached hereto and copies of which are on file in the City
68 Clerk's Office;
69
70 2. That, subject to the provisions of Paragraph (3) below, the City Council
71 hereby authorizes and directs the City Manager to execute the Regional Consent Order
72 and Memorandum of Agreement on behalf of the City of Virginia Beach and submit the
73 Regional Consemt Order Package to DEQ for public notice and approval by the SWCB;
74
75 3. That the City Council's approval of the Regional Consent Order is
76 expressly conditioned upon there being no material additions to, or alterations or
77 deletions of, any of its provisions that are, in the opinion of the City Attorney and City
2
78 Manager, adverse to the City of Virginia Beach, and the City hereby reserves the right
79 to revoke its approval in the event there are any such material changes in the final
80 Regional Consent Order issued by the State Water Control Board; and
81
82 4. That the City Manager and the City Attorney are hereby authorized and
83 directed to take such actions as may be necessary or appropriate to implement the
84 intent of this Resolution.
85
86 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
87 VIRGINIA BEACH:
88
89 That it commends the efforts of its staff and those of the other Localities, the
90 Hampton Roads Sanitation District, Hampton Roads Planning District Commission and
91 Department of Environmental Quality in connection with the development of the
92 Regional Consent Order Package.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on this _
day of , 2007.
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
~=~P:U~~~
CA10419
R-6
June 15, 2007
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY:
W ~jV( /JoJ'
City Attorney's Office
3
Policy Report
REGIONAL SPECIAL ORDER BY CONSENT
INTRODUCTION
This report is in support of a request for the City Council to approve the City's participation in the
Regional Special Order by Consent (Consent Order). This is a regulatory order between the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), Virginia Beach, the Hampton Roads Sanitation District
(HRSD) and other communities in Hampton Roads. The other participating communities are the cities
of Chesapeake, Hampton, Newport News, Poquoson, Portsmouth, Suffolk, Williamsburg; the counties of
Gloucester, Isle of Wight, and York; the James City Service Authority; and the town of Smithfield.
Norfolk is not included because it is already under a consent order with the DEQ and the HRSD. When
executed, the Consent Order has the same force and effect as state environmental law and regulation.
BACKGROUND
The federal Clean Water Act (CW A) prohibits the discharge of untreated wastewater into the waters of
the United States - it always has. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EP A) and the
DEQ (the state primacy agency) administer the CW A in Virginia. For most of the thirty-five years that
the CW A has been in existence, the regulatory focus for the EP A and DEQ has been the wastewater
treatment plants and the water quality of the related discharges to state waters.
However, alarmed by a nation-wide increase of sanitary sewer overflows (SSO's) caused by aging,
leaking, poorly maintained, and undersized collection systems, the EP A sent a report to Congress in
August 2004 outlining national enforcement actions and priorities for SSO control and reduction. EP A's
Office of Enforcement and Compliance (OECA) simultaneously adopted an enforcement strategy that all
major municipal colle,ction systems with a total treatment capacity of greater than 100 million gallons
per day (mgd) and the associated satellite collection systems would be under enforceable administrative
or judicial orders to control and reduce sanitary sewer overflows by September 2007. This strategy was
not related to the performance of the respective sanitary sewer systems. It was based solely upon the
size of the systems.
The HRSD and its municipal satellites comprise one of five sanitary sewer systems in EP A Region III
with a capacity of greater than 100 mgd. The other four (Allegany County/Pittsburgh, Baltimore,
Baltimore County; and the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission) are already under state and
federal orders for SSO reduction. Hampton Roads was the last system to be addressed because the EP A
felt this area had fewer problems relative to the other four regions. The EP A and DEQ presented their
expectations and requirements for a Regional Special Order by Consent to the Hampton Roads directors
of utilities and the HRSD in a September 2005 meeting facilitated by the staff of the Hampton Roads
Planning District Commission.
For the last 18 months, the directors of utilities and staff specialists, the HRSD and e HRPDC have
been working and negotiating with the DEQ and EP A to develop the Special Order y Consent and
supporting documents. These documents, dated May 2007 and included herewith, ve been
collectively assembled and entitled "Hampton Roads Regional Consent Order Pack~ge."
CONSIDERATIONS
The consent order will mandate evaluations, increased operations and maintenance, ~d increased capital
spending. Complying with this order could cost the HRSD upwards of $1 billion over the next two
decades, and an equal sum required of the satellite localities. Virginia Beach alone 40uld be required to
make additional expenditures of $200 million or more over the next 15 to 20 years.
Two years ago, City Council authorized five years of water and sewer rate increases to fund current
operations, and increase the Public Utilities Water and Sewer CIP from $15 million per year to $25
million per year to address aging infrastructure. Those rate increase were 6.5% for FY2006 and an
average of3.8% per year for FY2007 through FY2010.
Of the $25 million per year Public Utilities Water and Sewer CIP, $15 million per year is devoted to
aging sanitary sewer infrastructure. There is an overlap between aging sewer infrastructure and the
mandates in the Consent Order. Public Utilities has implemented, or is in the proce~s of implementing, a
number of the Consent Order mandates, and most of what is required would have been implemented,
eventually. However, the Consent Order will require programs and projects to be implemented at a
faster pace than Public Utilities would have recommended in the absence of the order. For Fiscal Years
2008 through 2012, the Consent Order will require approximately $5 million dollars per year more than
what was originally programmed in the CIP for sanitary sewer rehabilitation and repair.
Public Utilities proposes to address the FY2008 through 2010 shortfalls by reprioritizing projects in the
CIP and transfer of funds from retained earnings. Public Utilities is not requesting al rate increase above
what has been approved for FY2008, and it has established that same goal for FY20Q9 and 2010.
However, rate increases will definitely be required for FY2011 and beyond.
There will be other impacts that will result from the Consent Order. Fats, oils, and !fease (FOG) cause
about one-third of the City's sanitary sewer overflows and contribute to another one.lthird. As part of the
Regional Consent Order, all Hampton Roads localities will have to implement aggressive FOG control
programs.
The principle sources of FOG are single-family homes, multi-family apartments and1condominiums,
schools, jails, grocery stores and restaurants. The state plumbing code requires that the non-residential
FOG generators install and maintain FOG traps. Proper maintenance requires regul* removal of the
FOG, because when the traps fill up, they bypass the FOG directly to the sanitary sewer. However, there
is little or no enforcement with respect to pumping and cleaning of these devices - it iis essentially an
honor system. A recent pilot test by Public Utilities indicates that there is widespread. non-compliance
with respect to the cleaning and pumping of FOG traps. '
Permits and Inspections certifies that a FOG trap is installed when an applicable facility is permitted, but
it does not provide follow-up inspection or maintenance enforcement. It is possible that both Permits
and Inspections, and Housing and Neighborhood Preservation have the authority to conduct regular
inspections and maintenance enforcement. However, neither entity has ever been charged with this
responsibility, nor would they have the necessary manpower and resources to do it if they were. Public
Utilities will be requesting changes to the City Code to allow it to enforce FOG control with respect to
non-residential FOG generators.
Certain private properties including shopping centers, apartment complexes, trailer parks, condominiums
and private individual laterals can make significant infiltration and inflow (1&1) contributions to the
collection system. In fact, for some service areas, private-side 1&1 is the predominate factor. At the
present time, the City Code does not provide the authority to Public Utilities or any other department to
require private entities to make repairs for the purpose of reducing infiltration and inflow. Public
Utilities will be requesting changes to the City Code to allow it to require private property owners to
reduce the amount of infiltration and inflow from their systems.
The Consent Order does contain certain protections for municipalities that execute the order and carry
out the obligations, thc~rein. The Order conforms to federal and state law provisions, referred to as "safe
harbor" provisions, which provide that compliance with the Order protects the municipalities from fines
from DEQ or EPA for past SSO's and from third-party lawsuits seeking fines or injunctive relief for past
SSO's.
The HRSD and localities are scheduled to approve and execute the Consent Order in May and June
2007. The DEQ plans to submit the Consent Order to the State Register by July 2 for publication on July
23,2007. Following a 30-day comment period, the State Water Control Board will vote to authorize the
DEQ to execute the order during its September 2007 quarterly meeting.
PUBLIC INFORMATION
The Regional Consent Order was the subject of a City Council Briefing on June 5, 2007, and was also
discussed as part ofthl~ budget briefing for the Public Utilities Capital Improvement Program on May 1,
2007. The requested action has been advertised as part of the regular City Council agenda for June 12,
2007. Any requests for water or sewer rate increases, beyond those already approved by City Council,
or City Code changes for FOG control or private-side infiltration and inflow reduction would be made at
future City Council meetings. Those actions would be advertised and noticed as appropriate.
ALTERNATIVE COURSES OF ACTION
Technically, there are two alternatives - authorize execution of the Consent Order, or reject it. However,
as a practical matter, the City has little choice but to execute the Consent Order. EP A and DEQ have
said that any municipality that does not join the Consent Order will be prosecuted for violations of the
CW A. The agencies can do this because the Clean Water Act (CW A) contains a paradox: All SSO's are
prohibited - yet all large wastewater collection systems experience them, from time-to-time. This is
particularly true of systems with significant aging infrastructure, and located in low-lying, flood prone
areas with high water tables (like Hampton Roads).
With respect to any municipality that does not execute the Consent Order, standard operating procedure
would be for DEQ or EP A or both to seek fines for past and future SSO's, and injunctive orders that
would impose upon the municipality the same obligations (or more) that are contained in the Consent
Order.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
The course of action prescribed by the Consent Order will reduce SSO's, protect the environment,
protect the City from fines and third-party lawsuits, and contribute to the health, safety and welfare of
the residents of Virginia Beach. While the Consent Order will require the Department of Public Utilities
to implement programs and projects at a faster rate than it would have otherwise, there is little in the
order that Public Utilities would not have undertaken, eventually. It is recommended that Council
authorize the City Manager to sign and execute the proposed Regional Special Order by Consent in June
2007 for publication in the State Register on July 2,2007.
ATTACHMENT:
Hampton Roads Regional Consent Order Package
REVIEW AND APPROVAL:
_()J~)I/ /Vl~.
Reviewed by City Attorney
4!l~y~;1~~--rrc
(0 -~O..o 7-
Date
b - Z&'-07
Date
bjJ-b}OJ
D e
Regional Consent Order Package
Summary of Material Terms that Impact Virginia Beach
This is a summary of the document entitled "Hampton Roads Regional Consent Order Package."
The document is divided into three sections: 1) The Regional Special Order by Consent; 2)
Attachment 1 to the Special Order by Consent - the Regional Technical Standards; and 3) The
Regional Memorandum of Agreement.
1) Regional Consent Order
Section C: Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law - This is standard information from
DEQ that is contained in every DEQ order. It describes the wastewater system in Hampton
Roads, establishes that sanitary sewer overflows (SSO's) occur in violation of state law, and
states that there will be two-phases of orders to address the SSO's. This order is Phase One.
Phase Two will come after 2012. This section also establishes the regional approach to the
order.
Section D: Agreement and Order - This section includes the enforcement part of the order.
It requires Virginia Beach to comply with Appendix H of the order, as described below.
HRSD and th(~ other localities are reqqired to comply with their own respective appendices.
This section also establishes a requirement that HRSD and the localities develop a Regional
Wet Weather Management Plan (RWWMP).
Section E: Administrative Provisions - This section includes standard language for
modifying the consent order, venue, enforcement, force majure and termination. It also
includes a section that resolves all past SSO's and limits the potential for certain third party
lawsuits against the localities.
Appendix H _. City of Virginia Beach: This appendix, which is similar to the appendices for
the other locallities, requires the City to prepare a Sanitary Sewer Evaluation Survey (SSES)
plan due 15 month after the signing of the order. It also mandates certain interim repairs to
the sanitary se:wer system; requires a Management Operations & Maintenance (MOM) plan;
and requires annual reports to DEQ.
- 2) Regional Tecbnical Standards (RTS)
Introduction and Purpose: Outlines the purpose of the document.
Definition of Terms: Provides a definition of terms used in the Regional Technical
Standards.
Data Collection and Flow Monitoring: Requires analysis and characterization of the number
and causes of SSOs. Requires at least 20% of all sanitary sewer service areas to be
monitored for flow. Identifies criteria for implementation.
Condition Assessment of Sewers and Pump Stations: Identifies the method ld parts of the
sanitary sewer system that need condition assessment; identifies a fmd & fix rogram for
prioritization of system defects.
I
I
SSES Planning: Provides guidance for prioritization of sewer service areas thfit need SSES.
Hydraulic Performance Assessment: Provides guidance for the development ~f a sanitary
sewer system-wide hydraulic computer model.
Rehabilitation Planning: Provides guidance on prioritization of repairs neede~ from the
SSES plans performed above. :
I
Regional Wet Weather Management Plan: Outlines the purpose and method ~f performing
the RWWMP.
Exhibit A - Regional Design Guidelines: These are an agreed upon set of de$ign standards
for the entire region.
Exhibit B - Regional Sanitary Sewer System Operating Guidelines: These are an agreed
upon set of operating guidelines for the Hampton Roads Sanitation District.
3) Memorandum of Agreement
This agreement will be executed by the localities included in the Regional SPf' cial Order by
Consent and HRSD. I
Section A - Definitions: Standard definitions, consistent with those used in e Consent
Order.
Section B - Statement of Principals: This section declares that the localities d HRSD have
a shared responsibility to operate their respective systems effectively and effi iently; to share
data and information; to agree to implement the Regional Technical Standard and to make
decisions collectively on issues that will affect other localities and/or HRSD. It also declares
that we will work to reduce SSOs at the lowest overall cost to ratepayers, and that we will
seek to resolve disputes administratively before resorting to judicial action.
Section C - Roles and Responsibilities: This establishes HRPDC as a region facilitator, and
the HRPDC Directors of Utilities Committee (DUC) as the regional entity to oordinate and
facilitate all aspects of the Consent Order. HRSD agrees to participate and b a part of the
DUC. The localities agree to participate in the DUC and comply with the Co sent Order and
the Regional Technical Standards.
Section D - Compliance with Regional Technical Standards and Developme and
Implementation of Regional Wet Weather Management Plan: Each locality d HRSD agree
to work together to prepare and submit a RWWMP to DEQ on or before Dee mber 31,2013,
and to comply with that plan.
Section E - Proposed Modifications to the Regional Order and the Regional Technical
Standards: TIris section outlines how the localities will request and agree to modifications to
the Regional Special Order by Consent and the Regional Technical Standards. Modifications
to the Regional Technical Standards can be made only with the consent of all Utilities.
Section F - Rt::medies and Reservations of Rights: This section describes an administrative
dispute mechanism, and provides that an aggrieved party must show actual hann caused by
another party to institute formal legal action.
Section G - Miscellaneous: This section contains standard language for Amendments,
Severability, Authority, Reservation, Notices and Written Communications, Term,
Governing Law, Force Majeure, Counterparts, Not for Benefit of Third Parties, and Binding
Effect.
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: A Resolution to Extend the Suspension of Increases In Health Insurance
Premiums for Retirees
MEETING DATE: June 26, 2007
. Background: City Council was made aware of a proposal to increase the health
insurance premiums paid by retired City employees, effective January 1, 2007. By
resolution adopted in December 2006, City Council suspended the planned increase
until July 1, 2007. Since then, the Council-appointed Employee Benefits Task Force
has made recommendations to City Council regarding retiree benefits that would be
effective on January 1, 2008.
. Considerations: The City's health insurance programs are based on calendar
years, with the current year ending on December 31,2007. The attached resolution will
suspend the planned increase in retiree health insurance premiums until January 1,
2008. Until that time, health insurance premiums paid by City retirees will remain at the
2006 rates.
. Public Information: Public information will be handled through the normal
Council agenda notification process.
. Attachments: Resolution
Requested by Council member Diezel
Requested by Councilmember Diezel
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
A RESOLUTION TO EXTEND THE SUSPENSION
OF INCREASES IN HEALTH INSURANCE
PREMIUMS FOR RETIREES
WHEREAS, City Council was made aware of a proposal to increase the
premiums paid by retired City employees for health insurance coverage, effective
January 1, 2007; and
WHEREAS, on October 24, 2006, City Council created the Employee Benefits
Task Force (thE~ "Task Force") to make recommendations to City Council regarding
retiree benefits; and
WHEREAS, the Task Force has put forth recommendations regarding retiree
benefits, including health insurance, that would be effective January 1, 2008; and
WHEREI~.s, the City's health insurance programs are based on calendar years,
with the current year ending on December 31,2007.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:
1. That the planned increase in retiree health insurance premiums shall be
suspen~ed until January 1, 2008. Until that time, health insurance premiums paid by
City retirees shall remain at the 2006 rates.
2. That $217,000 is hereby transferred from the FY 2007-08 general fund
reserve for contiingencies to the health insurance fund.
of
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia on the
,2007.
day
Approved as to Legal Sufficiency:
::e~~
City Attorney's 0 Ice
-
CA 10433
June 12, 2007
R5
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: An Ordinance to Amend Sections 6-122, 6-122.01, 6-122.2 and 6-122.3 of the
City Code Pertaining to Boating Under the Influence
MEETING DATE: June 26, 2007
. Background: The 2007 General Assembly changed the time restraints imposed
to administer a blood or breath test on people suspected of boating under the influence
from within two hours to within three hours of vessel operation.
. Considerations:
. 9 6-122: This amendment changes the language in the City Cod$ to reflect the
language used in the state code. This amendment also provides f<>r the removal
of a vessel after the operator is arrested for boating under the influence.
. 9 6-122.01: This is just a housekeeping amendment that capitalizes
"Commonwealth" and "Section."
. 9 6-122.2: This amendment changes the time restraints for administering a
blood or breath test on people suspected of boating under the influence from
within two hours to within three hours of the time of vessel operation, pursuant to
a change in state law that will take effect on July 1, 2007. Aqditionally, this
amendment clarifies that if a person charged with operation of 9 watercraft or
motorboat while intoxicated needs to be taken to a medical facilit~ for treatment
instead of being taken to a magistrate, the arresting officer sh~1I advise the
defendant while.at the medical facility of the implied consent law. there are also
minor housekeeping amendments to this section. I
. 9 6-122.3: This amendment removes unnecessary languag$ and instead
cross-references language on the same subject found in the Code Of Virginia.
This ordinance is authorized by a change in state law that takes effect on July 1,
2007. The ordinance also will take effect on that date.
. Public Information: Public information will be handled through the normal
Council agenda process.
. Attachments: Ordinance
Recommended Action: Adopt
Submitting DepartmentlAgercy: Police Department
City Manager: I( ,~
1 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTIONS 6-
2 122, 6-122.01, 6-122.2 AND 6-122.3 OF THE
3 CITY CODE PERTAINING TO BOATING
4 UNDER THE INFLUENCE
5
6 SECTIONS AMENDED: 99 6-122, 6-122.01,
7 6-122.2 AND 6-122.3
8
9 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA
10 BEACH, VIRGINIA:
11
12 That Sections 6-122,6-122.01,6-122.2 and 6-122.3 of the Code of the City of
13 Virginia Beach, Virginia, are hereby amended and reordained to read as follows:
14
15 Sec. 6-122. Operating motor boat, vessel, water skis, etc., while under influence
16 of' intoxicating beverages or drugs ; penalty; removal of vessel.
17
18 (a) No person shall operate any watercraft or motorboat which is underway (i)
19 while such person has a blood alcohol concentration of 0.08 percent or more by weight,
20 by volume or 0.08 grams or more per two hundred and ten (210) litoFs of breath as
21 indicated by a ohemical test administered in accordance with section 6 122.2, at or
22 qreater than the blood alcohol concentration at which it is unlawful to drive or operate a
23 motor vehicle as provided in Code of Virqinia Section 18.2-266 as indicated by a
24 chemical test administered in accordance with Section 6-122.2, (ii) while such person is
25 under the influemce of alcohol, (iii) while such person is under the influence of any
26 narcotic drug or any other self-administered intoxicant or drug of whatsoever nature, or
27 any combination of such intoxicants or drugs to a deqree which impairs his ability to
28 operate the watercraft or motorboat safely, ef-(iv) while such person is under the
29 combined influence of alcohol and any drug or drugs, to a degree which ;mpairs his
30 ability to operate the watercraft or motorboat safely, or (v) while such person has a
31 blood concentration of any of the followinq substances at a level that is equal to or
32 qreater than: (a) 0.02 milliarams of cocaine per liter of blood. (b) 0.1 milliarams of
33 methamphetamine per liter of blood, (c) 0.01 milliarams of phencyclidine per liter of
34 blood, or (d) 0.1 milliqrams of 3,4-methylenedioxvmethamphetamine per liter of blood.
35
36 (b) For purposes of this article, the word "operate" shall include being in
37 actual physical control of a watercraft or motorboat and "underway" shall mean that a
38 vessel is not at anchor, or made fast to the shore, or aground.
39
40 (c) Any person who violates any provision of this sSection shall be guilty of a
41 Class 1 misdemeanor and subiect to the provisions of Code of Virqinia Section 29.1-
42 738.5.
43
44 (d) In any case in which a law enforcement officer arrests the operator of a
45 vessel. and there is no leaal cause for the retention of the vessel by the officer. the
46 officer shall allow the person arrested to desianate another person who is present at the
47
48
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
90
91
92
93
scene of the arrest to operate the vessel from the scene to a place desionated by the
person arrested. If such a desionation is not made. the officer may cause the vessel to
be taken to the nearest appropriate place for safekeepino.
COMMENT
This amendment makes this section consistent with the revised Code of Virginia provision
that is effective on July 1,2007. This amendment also provides for the removal ofa vessel after the
operator is arrested for boating under the influence.
Sec. 6-122.01.
Persons under age twenty-one operating watercraft after
consuming alcohol; penalty.
(a) It shall be unlawful for any person under the age of twenty-one (21) to
operate any watercraft or motorboat upon the waters of the GCommonwealth after
consuming alcohol. Any such person with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.02 percent
or more by weight by volume or 0.02 grams or more per two hundred and ten (210)
liters of breath but less than 0.08 by weight by volume or less than 0.08 grams per two
hundred and ten (210) liters of breath as indicated by a chemical test administered in
accordance with sSection 6-122.2 shall be in violation of this sSection.
(b) A violation of subsection (a) shall be punishable by denial by the court of
such person's privilege to operate a watercraft or motorboat for a period of six (6)
months from the date of conviction and by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars
($500.00). Any person convicted of a violation of this sSection shall be eligible to attend
an Alcohol Safety Action Program under the provisions of sSection 29.1-738.5 of the
Code of Virginia, as amended.
COMMENT
This amendment capitalizes "Commonwealth" and "Section."
Sec. 6-122.2. Consent to blood or breath test.
(a) Any person who operates a watercraft or motorboat which is underway
upon waters of the GCommonwealth shall be deemed thereby, as a condition of such
operation, to have consented to have samples of his or her blood, breath or both blood
and breath taken for a chemical test to determine the alcohol, drug or both alcohol and
drug content of his or her blood, if such person is arrested for operating a watercraft or
motorboat which is underway in violation of subsection (a) of sSections 6-122 or 6-
122.01, within two (2) three (3) hours of the alleged offense. Any person so arrested for
a violation of clause (i) or (ii), or both, of sSection 6-122(a), or for a violation of sSection
6-122.01(a), shall submit to a breath test. If the breath test is not available, or the
person is physically unable to submit to a breath test, a blood test shall be given. The
accused shall, prior to the administration of the test, be advised by the person
administering the test that he/she has a right to observe the process of analysis and to
see the blood-alcohol reading on the equipment used to perform the breath test. If such
94 equipment automatically produces a written printout of the breath test result, this written
95 printout, or a copy thereof, shall be given to the accused in each case.
96
97 (b) Any person, after having been arrested for a violation of clause (iii) 9f-~(iv)
98 or (v) of sSection 6-122(a) or for a violation of sSection 6-122.01, may be required to
99 submit to a blood test to determine the drug or both drug and alcohol content of his or
100 her blood. When a person, after having been arrested for a violation of clause (i) or (ii),
101 or both, of sSeGtion 6-122(a) or for a violation sSection 6-122.01, submits to a breath
102 test, in accordance with subsection (a) of this sSection, or refuses to take or is
103 incapable of taking such a breath test, he/she may be required to submit to tests to
104 determine the drug or both drug and alcohol content of his or her blood if the law-
105 enforcement officer has reasonable cause to believe the person was operating a
106 watercraft or motorboat under the influence of any drug or combination of drugs, or the
107 combined influence of alcohol and drugs.
108
109 (c) If a person, after being arrested for a violation of subsection (a) of
110 sSections 6-122 or 6-122.01 and after having been advised by the arresting officer that
111 a person who operates a watercraft or motorboat which is underway upon the waters of
112 the GCommonwHalth shall be deemed thereby, as a condition of such operation, to have
113 consented to have a sample of his or her blood and breath taken for a chemical test to
114 determine the alcohol or drug content of his or her blood, and that the unreasonable
115 refusal to do so constitutes grounds for a court to order him or her not to operate a
116 watercraft or motorboat which is underway upon the waters of the GCommonwealth,
117 then refuses to permit the taking of a sample of his or her blood or breath or both blood
118 and breath samples for such tests, the arresting officer shall take the person arrested
119 before a committing magistrate. If the person is unable to be taken before a magistrate
120 because the pe~rson is taken to a medical facility for treatment or evaluation of his
121 medical condition, the arresting officer at a medical facility, in the presence of a witness
122 other than a law-enforcement officer, shall again advise the person, at the medical
123 facility, of the law requiring blood or breath samples to be taken and the penalty for
124 refusal. If he/shE~ again so refuses after having been further advised by such magistrate
125 or by the arresting officer at the medical facility of the law requiring a blood or breath
126 sample to be tal<en and the penalty for refusal, and so declares again his or her refusal
127 in writing upon a form provided by the Supreme Court of Virginia, or refuses or fails to
128 so declare in wrilting and such fact is certified as prescribed in Code of Virginia, sSection
129 18.2-268.3, then no blood or breath sample shall be taken even though he/she may
130 thereafter request same.
131
132 (d) When any person is arrested for operating a watercraft or motorboat which
133 is underway in violation of subsection (a) of sSection 6-122, the procedures and
134 requirements of Code of Virginia, sSections 18.2-268.1 through 18.2-268.11 shall apply,
135 mutatis mutandis, to this sSection.
136
137 (e) If 1the court or jury finds the defendant guilty of unreasonably refusing to
138 permit a blood or breath sample to be taken, the court shall order such person not to
139 operate a watercraft or motorboat which is underway for a period of twelve (12) months
140 for a first offense and for twenty-four (24) months for a second or subsequent offense of
141 refusal within five (5) years of the first or other such refusal. However, if the defendant
142 pleads guilty to a violation of subsection (a) of sSections 6-122 or 6-122.01, the court
143 may dismiss the refusal warrant.
144
145 COMMENT
146
147 This amendment changes the time restraints for administering a blood or breath test on
148 people suspected of boating under the influence from within two hours to within three hours of the
149 time of vessel operation, as provided by the change in state law that is effective on July 1, 2007.
150 Additionally, this amendment clarifies that if a person charged with operation of a watercraft or
151 motorboat while intoxicated needs to be taken to a medical facility for treatment instead of being
152 taken to a magistrate, the arresting officer shall advise the defendant while at the medical facility of
153 the implied consent law.
154
155 Sec. 6-122.3. Presumptions from alcoholic content.
156
157 In any prosecution for operation of a watercraft or motorboat which is underway
158 in violation of clause (ii) or (iv) of subsection (a) of sSection 6-122, the amount of
159 alcohol in the blood of the accused at the time of the alleged offense as indicated by a
160 chemical analysis of a sample of the accused's blood or breath to determine the
161 alcoholic content of his blood in accordance with the provisions of sSection 6-122.2
162 shall give rise to the following rebuttable presumptions.;..at Code of Viroinia Section 18.2-
163 269(A)(1) throuoh (4).
164
165 (1) If there was at th3t time 0.05 percent or less by weight by volume of
166 31cohol in the accused's blood, or 0.05 grams or less per two hundred ten (210) liters of
167 the accused's breath, it shall be presumed that the 3coused ':Jas not under the influence
168 of alcoholic intoxicants;
169
170 (2) If there was at that time in excess of 0.05 percent but less th3n 0.08
171 percent by ':,eight by volume of alcohol in the accused's blood, or 0.05 grams but less
172 than 0.08 grams per two hundred ten (210) liters of the accused's breath, such facts
173 sh311 not give rise to any presumption that the accused '.\'as or 'Nas not under the
174 influence of alcoholic intoxicants, but such bcts m3Y be considered with other
175 competent evidence in determining the guilt or innooence of the accused;
176
177 (3) If there was at that time O.OB percent or more by weight by volume of
178 31cohol in the 3ccused's blood, or O.OB grams or more per two hundred ten (210) liters
179 of the 3ccused's bre3th, it shall be presumed that the accused 'Nas under the influence
180 of alcoholic intoxicants.
181
182 COMMENT
183
184 This amendment removes unnecessary language and instead cross-references language on
185 the same subject in the Code of Virginia.
186 Be it further ordained that the effective date of this ordinance shall be July 1,
187 2007.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on this _
day of , 2007.
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
J:yr /t/5r:Zfv & _
Police Department c::::;:7
CA 10408
R-4
June 5, 2007
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY:
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM:
An Ordinance to Amend Sections 2-462 and 2-464 of the City Code
Pertaining to High Constable
MEETING DATE: June 26,2007
. Background: The City Attorney's Office periodically reviews the City Code to
ensure that references to the state code and other provisions of the City Code
are still accurate. City Code Sections 2-462 and 2-464 contain out-dated
references. These code sections appoint the Sheriff as high constable. In that
capacity, the Sheriff designates Deputy Sheriffs to act on his behalf in carrying
out such duties as executing processes, warrants, summons and notices issued
from, or returnable to, the General District Court. The Sheriff as high constable
also collects specified fees for deposit into the City treasury.
. Considerations: Adopting this ordinance will update these code sections with
corrected citations to the state code and a related city code provision. The
amendment also adds an additional reference to the City Charter, which
mandates the appointment of a high constable and provides that the Sheriff may
act as the high constable.
. Public Information: This Ordinance will be advertised in the same manner as
other agenda items.
. Attachments: Ordinance
Recommended Action: Adopt Ordinance
Submitting DepartmentlAgenc
City Manager~
1 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTIONS 2-462 AND
2 2-464 OF THE CITY CODE PERTAINING TO HIGH
3 CONSTABLE
4
5 SECTIONS AMENDED: ~ 2-462 AND 2-464
6
7 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA
8 BEACH, VIRGINIA:
9
10 That Sections 2-462 and 2-464 of the Code of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia,
11 are hereby amended and reordained to read as follows:
12
13 Sec. 2-462. High constable; appointment.
14
15 Pursuant to sections 20.11 and 20.14 of the Charter, the sheriff is hereby
16 appointed as the~ high constable and is authorized to designate deputy sheriffs to act on
1 7 his behalf in canying out the duties of the high constable as set forth in section 4 463 2-
18 463.
19
20
21
22 Sec. 2-464. FeE~s collected by high constable.
23
24 (a) Th,e fees collected by the high constable shall be the same as those fees
25 setforth in section 14.1 10517.1-273 of the Code of Virginia, as amended.
26
27 (b) All such fees shall be deposited into the city treasury for use in the general
28 operation of the city.
29
30 COMMENT
31
32 This is a housekeeping amendment. For example, where the fees referenced in City Code
33 sections were once found in Code of Virginia ~ 14.1-105, they are now located at Code of Virginia ~
34 17.1-273.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on this _
day of , 2007.
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY:
~~
<~~~
She~ifr1 Departmen
CA 10283
R-3
May 29,2007
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: An Ordinance to Amend Section 21-303 of the City Code, Repe~1 Section 21-
307, and Add Section 21-312, All Pertaining to Parking Prohibitions i
I
!
MEETING DATE: June 26, 2007
. Background: The 2007 General Assembly changed the state aw regarding
vehicle inspections to prohibit parking on streets or highways with ut a current
inspection sticker. Because the City Code incorporates by reference pr visions of the
state traffic code, a similar restriction regarding inspection stickers I hat currently
appears in the City Code may be removed, effective July 1, 2007, which lis the date on
which the revised state law takes effect. Additionally, while reviewing liS change in
state law and the corresponding City Code provisions, the City Attorney' Office found
that several housekeeping amendments are needed to remove additio al redundant
provisions, to ensure consistency with state law, and to clarify the penalt es for parking
violations and the procedure for pre-payment of resulting fines. .
I
. C.onsiderations: Prohibitions regarding parking near a fire h drant, near a
rescue squad, in an intersection, in front of a private driveway, or on a hi hway without
a valid inspection sticker are being deleted because those provisions ar contained in
state laws that have been incorporated into the City Code by reference. he-prohibition
currently contained in City Code 9 21-307 regarding parking with vali and current
license plates is being moved to City Code 9 21-303(c), so 9 21-307 will b~ repealed.
i
The addition of City Code 9 21-312 clarifies the penalties f9r all parking
violations, as well as the procedure for pre-payment of resulting fines. I
i
I
The remaining changes are technical in nature and are being m de to ensure
consistency with state law. The effective date of this ordinance is July 1, 007.
. Public Information: This ordinance will be advertised in the sa e manner as
other Council agenda items.
. Attachments: Ordinance
Recommended Action: Adopt
Submitting Department/Agency: Police
City Manager: t · ~
1 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTION 21-
2 303 OF THE CITY CODE, REPEAL SECTION
3 21-307, AND ADD SECTION 21-312, ALL
4 PERTAINING TO PARKING PROHIBITIONS
5
6 SECTION AMENDED: 9 21-303
7 SECTION REPEALED: 9 21-307
8 SECTION ADDED: 921-312
9
10 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA
11 BEACH, VIRGINIA:
12
13 That Section 21-303 of the Code of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, is hereby
14 amended and re~ordained, that Section 21-307 is hereby repealed, and Section 21-312
15 is hereby added and ordained to read as follows:
16
17 Sec. 21-303. GEmeral parking prohibitions; penalties for violation.
18
19 (a) No person shall park a vehicle, except when necessary to avoid conflict
20 with other traffic or in compliance with the directions of a police officer or traffic-control
21 device, in any of the following places:
22 (1) VVithin fifteen (15) feet of a fire hydrant.
23 ~ill Within any designated fire lane.
24 ~m At any place so as to block any fire department connection.
25 {4t@ Within fiftoen (15) seventy-five (75) feet of the driveway entrance to any
26 fire, station aM, if properly posted. or on the side of a street opposite the
27 entrance to any fire station, within seventy five (75) feet of the entrance,
28 ~on properly signposted.
29 (5) \^/i1thin fifteen (15) feet of the entrance to a building housing rescue squad
30 equipment or ambulances, provided such buildings are plainly designated.
31 {etffi In front of a public or private driveway.
32 (7) 'Nithin an intersection.
33 {8t@ On the roadway side of any vehicle parked at the edge or curb of a street
34 (double parking).
35 t9tiID Upon any bridge or other elevated structure upon a street or highway or
36 within a tunnel.
37 fWtillOn the left-hand side of roadway of a two-way street. The provisions of
38 this sub-section exclude those city vehicles operated by city employees
39 eXBcuting official duties that require repeated vehicle exit and entry.
40 ~iIDAt any place so as to impede or render dangerous the use of any street or
41 highway.
42
43 (b) No person shall park a vehicle, except when necessary to avoid conflict
44 with other traffic or in compliance with the directions of a police officer or traffic-control
45 device, in any of the following places:
46 (1) On a sidewalk.
47 (2) On a crosswalk.
48 (3) Within twenty (20) feet of a marked crosswalk at an intersection; provided,
49 however, that 't:her-o thero is no cross'Nalk at an intersection, no person
50 shall so park a vehicle within t\A:enty (20) foet from the intersection of curb
51 lines or, if none, then within fifteen (15) foet of the intersection of property
52 HRes.
53 (4) Within thirty (30) feet upon the approach to any flashing beacon, stop sign
54 or traffic-control signal located at the side of a roadway.
55 (5) Between a safety zone and the adjacent curb or within thirty (30) feet of
56 points on the curb immediately opposite the ends of a safety zone, unless
57 a different length is indicated by official signs or markings.
58 (6) Within fifty (50) feet of the nearest rail of a railroad grade crossing.
59 (7) Alongside or opposite any street excavation or obstruction, when such
60 parking would obstruct traffic.
61 (8) At any place where official signs prohibit, reserve or restrict parking.
62 (9) In a residential or apartment district (area), if such vehicle is a commercial
63 vehicle in excess of twenty (20) feet in length and/or seven (7) feet in
64 height. This restriction shall not apply to commercial vehicles parked while
65 engaged in the normal conduct of business or in the delivery or provision
66 of goods or services in a residential or apartment district (area).
67 (10) At any place so as to prevent the use of a curb ramp located on public
68 property or on privately owned property open to the public.
69 (11) At any place, angle parked or perpendicular to a curb, unless street
70 markings permit.
71 (12) On any street or highway or any City parking lot, displaying a sign or
72 lettering indicating that the vehicle is offered for sale or rent.
73
74 (c) No person shall park on any street or highway, or on any City parking lot,
75 any vehicle which fails to display one (1) or more of the follO'.ving:
76 (1)!\ '.(3Iid state 'Jehicle safety inspection decal.
77 (2) V yalid and current state license plates.
78
79 (d) (1) 'A/hen a notice or citation is attached to a vehicle found parked in
80 violation of 3ny pro'.'ision of this Section, the O\\'ner of the vehicle may,
81 '):ithin fourteen (14) calendar days thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer, in
82 s3tisfaction of such viol3tion, a penalty of thirty five dollars ($35.00), for a
83 violation of any provision of subsection (a) or (c), except (a)(2), or wlent)'
84 doll3rs ($20.00) for a violation of any provision of subsection (b), for each
85 hour or fraction thereof during '::hich such vehicle ':.(as unl3'lJfully p3rked.
86 Such payment shall constitute a plea of guilt)' of the violation in question. If
87 such payment is not postm3rked or received by the City Treasurer '::ithin
88 fourteen (14) calendar d3Ys 3fter issuance of such notice or citation, the
89 penalty shall be seventy dollars ($70.00) for 3 '.'iolation of any provision of
90 subsection (a) or (c) of this scction, except (a)(2) , 3nd forty dollars
91 ($40.00) for a violation of any provision of subsection (b) of this Section.
92 ~ For violations of subsection (a)(2), the penalty shall be fifty dollars
93 ~)Q.OO) if paid to the City Tre3surer within fourteen (14) days after the
94 Re=tice or citation is issued, and if payment is not postmarked or received
95 By- the City Tre3surer '.vithin fourteen (11) d3Ys 3fter issuance of the notice
96 Gf-citation, the penalty shall be one hundred dollars ($100.00).
97
98 (e) The failure of any owner to make payment in accord '#ith subsection (d)
99 above or present the notice or citation for a violation of this Section at an office of the
100 City Treasurer for certification to the General District Court, within thirty (30) days, shall
101 render such owner subject to a fine of not more than fifty dollars ($50.00) in addition to
102 the penalty prescribed by subsection (d).
103
104 (d) Penalties
105 (1) When a notice or citation is attached to a vehicle found parked in violation of
106 any provision of this Section or Section 21-1 incorporatino the provisions of Title 46.2 of
107 the Code of Viroinia, the owner of the vehicle may pay to the City Treasurer, in
108 satisfaction of any such violation, a penalty fine as listed below when such payment is
109 postmarked or received by the City Treasurer within fourteen (14) calendar day after
110 issuance of such a notice or citation. Such payment shall constitute a plea of ouilty to
111 the violation in Question.
112 (i) A penalty fine as provided by the Rules of the Supreme Court for all violations
113 of City Code Section 21-1 incorporatino the provisions of Title 46.2 of the Code of
114 Viroinia.
115 (ii) A penalty fine of thirty-five dollars ($35) for a violation of any provision of
116 subsection (a), except (a)(2), for each hour or fraction thereof durino which such
117 vehicle was unlawfully parked.
118 Wi) A pl~nalty fine of twenty dollars ($20) for a violation of any provision of
119 subsection (b) for each hour or fraction thereof durino which such vehicle was
120 unlawfullv parked.
121 (iv) A penalty fine of thirty-five dollars ($35) for a violation of subsection (c) for
122 each day or fraction thereof durino which such vehicle was unlawfully parked.
123 (v) A penalty fine of fifty dollars ($50) for a violation of subsection (a)(2) for each
124 hour or fraction thereof durino which such vehicle was unlawfully parked.
125 (2) If SUGh payment is not postmarked or received by the City Treasurer within
126 fourteen (14) calendar days after issuance of such notice or citation, the penalty fine
127 shall increase to double that indicated above.
128 (3) For failure to respond to notices or citations within thirty (30) days, refer to
129 Section 21-312(b) below.
130
131 COMMENT
132
133 Prohibitiollls regarding parking near a fire hydrant, near a rescue squad, in an intersection,
134 in front of a private driveway, or on a highway without a valid inspection sticker are being deleted
135 because those provisions are contained in state laws that have been incorporated into the City Code
136 by reference. Provisions of this section regarding penalties and the payment of fines have been
137 revised for clarity and to ensure compliance with state law. Subsection (d)(l)(i) references the fee
138 schedule establisbed by the Rules of the Supreme Court for violations of state traffic code
139 provisions that have been incorporated by reference into the City Code. The fine ~mount for these
140 violations appears on tickets issued by parking enforcement officials.
141
142 Sec. 21 307. Parking vehicle ~Nithout current state license.
143
144 It shall bo unla':Jful for any person to park any vehicle having no cu~rent state
145 license on any highway within the City. !
146
147 COMMENT
148
149 The prohibition contained in this repealed section has been moved to Sectiolil 21-303(c).
150
151 Sec. 21-312 Penalty for violations of Division: Fine for Failure to fay in Timely
152 Manner.
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168 COMMENT
169
170 Subsection (a) clarifies that the penalties for violations of parking prohibitipns for which no
171 fine is explicitly set forth are $35, or $70 if payment is not postmarked or rece~ved by the City
172 Treasurer within 14 days after receipt of the ticket. Those prohibitions for which bo fine currently
173 is explicitly set forth are contained in City Code ~~ 21-302, -304, -305, -306, -308, -$09, -310. Those
174 sections address, respectively: parking in the middle of a street or highway; displa)!ing a "For Sale"
175 sign on a vehicle parked on a street; washing for payment a vehicle parked on a street or sidewalk;
176 backing a vehicle to a curb (except when loading or unloading merchandise); parking in street
177 sweeping zones; improper use of loading zones; and unauthorized parking at bus~stops or taxicab
178 stands. Subsection (b) authorizes a court to impose a supplementary fine of up to r50 for failure to
179 either pay the penalty or note an appeal within 30 days of the notice or citation. . .
180
181 Be it further ordained that the effective date of this ordinance is July 1, 2007.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virgini~, on this _
day of , 2007.
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
CA 10406
R-4
June 1, 2007
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY:
~~
~~
~~.~..........""'...'~
;",f, ., ' ..~~,
(.... .." . -, r'~
(v~........; '.>}
(;.\~,:;,,:: ;:J
, ~~.... '/ I!
~~. ~.~.:r
-..""""....
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: An Ordinance to Amend Sections 23-22.1 and 23-22.2 of the City Code
Pertaining to Drinking Alcoholic Beverages in Public Places or on Public School
Grounds
MEETING DATE: June 26,2007
. Background: The 2007 General Assembly amended the state law prohibiting
drinking alcoholic beverages in public by amending the definition of "public place" to
include highways, streets, lanes and sidewalks adjoining any highway, street or lane.
The City Code prohibits drinking in public places, but it does not contain this broader
definition. Additionally, while reviewing this change in state law and the corresponding
City Code provisions, the City Attorney's Office found that the City Code provision
regarding drinking or possessing alcohol on school property needs to be revised in
order to bring it into conformity with state law.
. Considerations: Amending City Code 9 23-22.1 by citing Code of Virginia 9
4.1-100 will provide a reference to the updated definition of "public place" and will also
avoid the necessity of revising the City Code if a future General Assembly changes the
definition of that term again. The amendment of City Code 9 23-22.2 mirrors state law
regarding consuming or possessing alcohol on school property. A violation will be
punishable as a Class 2 misdemeanor (up to 6 months in jail and/or a $1,000 fine). The
amendment also excludes from the prohibition religious congregations on school
grounds that use wine for sacramental purposes only. This ordinance Will take effect
upon adoption.
. Public Information: This ordinance will be advertised in the same manner as
other Council agenda items.
. Attachments: Ordinance.
Recommended Action: Approval.
Submitting Department/Agency: Police Departmen~
City Manager:~. ~1lI"z..
1 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTIONS 23-
2 22.1 AND 23-22.2 OF THE CITY CODE
3 PERTAINING TO DRINKING ALCOHOLIC
4 BEVERAGES IN PUBLIC PLACES OR ON
5 PUBLIC SCHOOL GROUNDS
6
7 SECTIONS AMENDED: SS 23-22.1 AND 23-22.2
8
9 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA
10 BEACH, VIRGINIA:
11
12 That Sections 23-22.1 and 23-22.2 of the Code of the City of Virginia Beach,
13 Virginia, are hereby amended and reordained to read as follows:
14
15 Sec. 23-22.1. Drinking alcoholic beverages, or tendering to another, in public
16 place.
17
18 (a) If any person shall take a drink of alcoholic beverage or shall tender a
19 drink thereof to another, whether accepted or not, or manually possess any unsealed or
20 open container of any kind which contains an alcoholic beverage, at or in any public
21 place, as defined bv section 4.1-100, Code of VirQinia, or on or within any vehicle
22 located in a public place, he shall be guilty of a Class 4 misdemeanor.
23
24 (b) It shall be unlawful and punishable as a Class 4 misdemeanor for any
25 person to consume an alcoholic beverage while driving a motor vehicle upon a public
26 highway of this Gity. A rebuttable presumption that the driver has consumed an alcoholic
27 beverage in violation of this section shall be created if (i) an open container is located
28 within the passenger area of the motor vehicle, (ii) the alcoholic beverage in the open
29 container has been at least partially removed and (iii) the appearance, conduct, odor of
30 alcohol, speech or their physical characteristic of the driver of the motor vehicle may be
31 reasonably associated with the consumption of an alcoholic beverage.
32
33 (c) This section shall not prevent any person from drinking alcoholic
34 beverages or offering a drink thereof to another in the dining room or other designated
35 room, as defined in section 4-25, Code of Virginia, of a hotel, restaurant, club or boat, or
36 in a dining car, club car, or buffet car of any train, or beer only within all seating areas,
37 concourses, walkways, concession areas, as well as other additional locations
38 designated by the Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission, in coliseums,
39 stadia, or similar facilities, during the performance of a professional sporting exhibition
40 or event, provided such beer is served in a paper, plastic or similar disposable
41 container, or in any other establishment, provided such hotel, restaurant, club, boat,
42 dining car, club car, buffet car, coliseum, stadium or similar facility or other
43 establishment, or the person who operates the same, including a concessionaire, is
44 licensed to sell at retail for consumption in such dining room, room, car, seating areas,
45 concourses, walkways, concession areas, as well as other additional locations
46 designated by the commission, in such coliseum, stadium or similar facility or
47 establishment, such alcoholic beverages, and the alcoholic beverages drunk or offered
48 were purchased therein.
49
50 COMMENT
51
52 This amendment cross-references the definition of "public place" that is found in the state
53 code.
54
55 Sec. 23-22.2. Drinking or possession of alcoholic beverages in or on public
56 school grounds.
57
58 If any person, in or upon the grounds of any free public elementary or secondary
59 school, during school hours or school or student activities, shall take a drink of any
60 alcoholic beverage or have in his possession any alcoholic be'.'erage, he shall be guilty
61 of a misdemeanor punishable by confinement in jail for not more than six (6) months
62 ~md a fine of not more than fi'Je hundred dollars ($500.00), either or both.
63
64 a. No person shall possess or drink any alcoholic beveraoe in or upon the
65 orounds of any public elementary or secondary school durino school hours or durino
66 school or student activities.
67
68 b. No person shall drink and no oroanization shall serve any alcoholic
69 beveraoe in or upon the orounds of any public elementary or secondary school after
70 school hours. or after student activities. except for relioious conoreoations usino wine
71 for sacramental purposes only.
72
73 c. Any person convicted of a violation of this section shall be ouilty of a Class
74 2 misdemeanor.
75
76 COMMENT
77
78 The amendment brings this Code section into conformity with state law. A violation will be
79 punishable as a Class 2 misdemeanor (up to 6 months in jail and/or a $1,000 fine). An exception to
80 the prohibition on alcohol on school grounds is made for religious congregations that use wine for
81 sacramental purposes only.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on this _
day of , 2007.
T: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY:
c~~y-
CA10420
R-6
June 13, 2007
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: An Ordinance to Add Section 23-43.1 to the City Code Pertaining t Trespassing
on Public Transportation
MEETING DATE: June 26, 2007
. Background: The 2007 General Assembly enacted a law effectiv July 1, 2007
that prohibits trespassing on public transportation vehicles. For exampl , the law will
prohibit a disruptive passenger from remaining on an HRT bus after bei g told by the
driver to get off the bus. A violation of this law will constitute a Class 4 isdemeanor,
punishable by a fine of not more than $250.
. Considerations: State law allows the City to adopt an ordinanc that contains
the same provisions as this new state .law. Mirroring this provision in the City Code will
allow fines for such violations to be paid to the City instead of the state. his ordinance
has an effective date of July 1, 2007.
. Public Information: This ordinance will be advertised in the sa e manner as
other Council agenda items.
. Attachments: Ordinance
Recommended Action: Adopt
Submitting Department/Agency: Police DepartmenP
City Manager:~ I( ~&"2z.
1 AN ORDINANCE TO ADD SECTION 23-43.1
2 TO THE CITY CODE PERTAINING TO
3 TRESPASSING ON PUBLIC
4 TRANSPORTATION
5
6 SECTION ADDED: S 23-43.1
7
8 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA
9 BEACH, VIRGINIA:
10
11 That Section 23-43.1 of the Code of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, is hereby
12 added to read as follows:
13
14 Sec. 23-43.1 Trespassing on public transportation; penalty
15
16 .@l Any person who enters or remains upon or within a vehicle operated by a
17 public transportation service withoutthe permission of, or after having been forbidden to
18 do so by the owner, lessee, or authorized operator thereof is guilty of a Class 4
19 misdemeanor.
20
21 !Ql "Public transportation service" means passenger transportation service
22 provided by bus, rail or other surface conveyance that provides transportation to the
23 general public 011 a regular and continuing basis.
24
25 COMMENT
26
27 The 2007 General Assembly enacted a law prohibiting trespassing on public transportation
28 vehicles that is effective July 1,2007. A violation ofthis law will constitute a Class 4 misdemeanor,
29 punishable by a tine of not more than $250. The City Code does not have such a provision.
30 Mirroring this provision in the City Code will allow fines for such violations to be paid to the City.
31
32 Be it further ordained that the effective date of this ordinance is July 1, 2007.
33
34 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on this _
35 day of , 2007.
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL
SUFFICIENCY:
~~
City Attorney's Office
CA10410
R-4
June 14, 2007
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: An Ordinance to Add Section 38-2.1 of the City Code Pertaining to ingerprinting
for Concealed Handgun Permits
MEETING DATE: June 26, 2007
. Background: The 2007 General Assembly amended the state I w relating to
the fingerprinting of applicants for a concealed handgun permit. Thos permits are
issued by the circuit court, and a background check is part of the applic tion process.
The revised law provides that only individuals filing for a new concealed Irearm permit
may be required to submit to fingerprinting for the purposes of de ermining the
applicant's criminal history. The law also provides that an applican applying for
renewal of an exiting Virginia permit shall not be required to provide finger rints.
. Considerations: This amendment will authorize the Police Depart ent to obtain
fingerprints from all new concealed handgun permit applicants and wi I prohibit the
department from requiring fingerprints for the renewal of an existing V rginia permit.
This ordinance will take effect on July 1, 2007.
. Public Information: This ordinance will be advertised in the sa e manner as
other Council agenda items.
. Attachments: Ordinance
Recommended Action: Adopt ./
Submitting DepartmentlAgeny~: Police Department~
CityManage~S ~. ~
1 AN ORDINANCE TO ADD SECTION 38-2.1
2 TO THE CITY CODE PERTAINING TO
3 FINGERPRINTING FOR CONCEALED
4 HANDGUN PERMITS
5
6 SECTION ADDED: S 38-2.1
7
8 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA
9 BEACH, VIRGINIA:
10
11 That Section 38-2.1 of the Code of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, is hereby
12 added to read as follows:
13
14 Sec.38-2.1 Finaerprints reauired; exception
15
16 ID As authorized bv Code of Viroinia & 15.2-915.3, each person filino an
17 application for a concealed firearm permit shall submit to finoerprintino for the purposes
18 of obtainino the applicant's state or national criminal history record.
19
20 Ql Finoerprintino shall not be required for the renewal application of an
21 existino permit issued pursuant to Cod~ ofViroinia & 18.2-308(1).
22
23 COMMENT
24
25 This amendment will allow the police department to obtain fingerprints from all new
26 concealed handgun permit applicants but will prohibit the department from requiring fingerprints
27 for the renewal of an existing permit.
28
29 Be it further ordained that the effective date of this ordinance is July 1, 2007.
30
31 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on this_
32 day of , 2007.
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
APPROVED AS
SUFFICIENCY:
TO
LEGAL
;::;!!?~ ~
City Attorney's Office
-
CA 10411
R-4
June 14,2007
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: Ordinances Pertaining to Terms of Members of the Beaches a d Waterways
Advisory Commission (City Code Section 6-162; Amendment to Byaws)
MEETING DATE: June 26, 2007
. Background: The Beaches and Waterways Advisory Co miSSIon was
established in 2000. In accordance with City Code Section 6-162, the init al terms of the
members were staggered, after which all terms were for three years. Be ause all of the
initial terms have been completed, there is no need to keep the provision for staggered
terms in the City Code or Commission's Bylaws.
The City Code Section and the Bylaws also currently provide that II subsequent
appointments to the Commission are for three years; this provision will be retained.
. Considerations: The ordinances are housekeeping measures that eliminate
unnecessary language from City Code Section 5-162 and Commissio 's Bylaws and
conform the Bylaws to the provisions of the City Code. All further appo ntments to the
Commission will be for three - year terms.
. Public Information: The matters will be advertised as regul r City Council
agenda items I
I
. Recommendations: Adoption of ordinances i
. Attachments: Ordinances amending City Code Section 6-162 an~ Bylaws;
amended Bylaws
Recommended Action: Adoption of both Ordinances.
Submitting Department/Agency: City Attorney
City Manage. !:, L . C€ll/'h...
1 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTION 6-162 OF THE CITY
2 CODE PERTAINING TO THE TERMS OF MEMBERS OF
3 THE BEACHES AND WATERWAYS ADVISORY
4 COMMISSION
5
6 SeGtion Amended: City Code ~ 6-162
7
8 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH,
9 VIRGINIA:
10
11 That the City Code is hereby amended and reordained by the amendment of
12 Section 6-162 to read as follows:
13
14 CHAPTER 6
15 BEACHES, BOATS AND WATERWAYS
16
17
18
19 ARTICLE VIII. BEACHES AND WATERWAYS ADVISORY COMMISSION
20
21
22
23 Sec. 6-162. Composition; terms of members.
24
25 (a) ~he commission shall be comprised of eleven (11) members, with one member
26 being appointed by city council from the residents of each of the city's seven (7) election
27 districts, and four (4) members being appointed by city council from the residents of the
28 city at large. Members shall be appointed for terms of three (3) years.
29
30 (b) The initial terms of ~A'O (2) at large members and the members appointed from
31 the Bayside, Be:lCh and Centerville districts shall be for three (3) years; tho initial terms
32 of one at largo member and the members appointed from the Kempsville and
33 Lynnh3ven districts shall be for t\l'lO (2) years; and the initial terms of one at large
34 member and the members appointed from the Princess /\nne and Rose Hall districts
35 shall be for one year. Thereafter, the torms of 311 membors shall be for three (3) years.
36
37 COMMENT
38
39 City Codc;~ Section 6-162 currently provides that the initial terms of the members of the
40 Commission were staggered and that subsequent terms were for three (3) years. Because all initial
41 terms have been served, there is no need to retain the provisions for staggered terms.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the
day of , 2007.
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL
SUFFICIENCY:
hilMl;f.NQ/A}
City Attorney's Office
CA 10426
R-4
June 15, 2007
1 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE BYLAWS OF THE
2 BEACHES AND WATERWAYS COMMISSION REGARDING
3 TERMS OF MEMBERSHIP
4
5 WHEREAS, the Bylaws of the Beaches and Waterways Advisory Commission
6 were adopted by the City Council on May 23, 2000; and
7
8 WHEREAS, such Bylaws provided for staggered initial terms of members of the
9 Commission; and
10
11 WHEREAS, all such initial terms have expired, such that there is no further need
12 to provide for staggered initial terms for the Commission.
13
14 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
15 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:
16
17 That Article III, Sections 2 and 3 and Article V, Section 1 of the Bylaws of the
18 Beaches and Waterways Advisory Commission are hereby amended and reordained to
19 read as follows:
20 ARTICLE III
21 MEMBERS
22
23
24
25 Section 2. Ternl. The initial terms of the members appointed from the Bayside, Beach
26 and Centerville districts shall be for three (3) years; the initial terms of the one (1) at
27 large member and the members appointed from the Kempsville and Lynnhaven districts
28 shall be for two (2) years; and the initial terms of the one (1) at large member and the
29 members appointed from the Princess ^nne and Rose Hall districts shall be for onD (1)
30 year. Thereafter, a_members Members shall be appointed to serve more than three
31 (3) years terms, and in accordance with ~ Section 2-3 of the City Code, no member shall
32 be appointed to serve more than three (3) consecutive three-year terms. ,A.l1 initial
33 appointments shall commence on the same date.
34
35 Section 3. Qualifications. Each member must be a resident of the district from which he
36 or she is appointed, and the at-large member~ must be a-resident~ of the City of Virginia
37 Beach. The appointees shall have knowledge and experience concerning beach and
38 waterway-related issues.
39
40 ARTICLE V
41 REPORTS
42
43 Section 1. Annual Report. Within forty-five (45) days of the end of the rascal fiscal
44 year, the Commission shall prepare, and submit to City Council, an annual report of its
45 activities, recommendations, and proposals, including a financial statement, if
46 applicable.
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
I
I
I
I
~ ;r~e copy of the Bylaws of the Beaches and Waterways AdViSO~ Commission
is attached as amended. I
i
I
COMMENTS I
The Bylaws of the Beaches and Waterways Advisory Commission curre tly provide for
staggered initial terms of its members. The proposed amendments delete those rovisions, as all
initial terms have expired. The language providing that all subsequent terms are fi r three (3) years
is retained.
of
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia on th
,2007.
day
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL
SUFFICIENCY:
~ 14.iJ6u/
City Attorney's Office
CA 10442
R-2
June 15, 2007
BYLAWS OF THE BEACHES AND WATERWAYS
ADVISORY COMMISSION
ARTICLE I
NAME
The name of the commission shall be the Beaches and Waterways Advisory
Commission.
ARTICLE II
PURPOSE
The purpose of the Commission shall be:
1. To review issues referred to it by City Council concerning access to, and the
preservation, development and use of, the City's beaches and waterways, and to make
recommendations to the City Council regarding such issues.
2. To serve~ as the City's local erosion advisory commission and carry out the
responsibilities imposed on such local commissions pursuant to 9 10.1-711 of the Code
of Virginia.
ARTICLE III
MEMBERS
Section 1. Number. The Commission shall be comprised of eleven (11) members, with
one (1) member being appointed by City Council from the residents of each of the City's
seven (7) election districts, and four (4) members being appointed by City Council from
residents of the City at large.
Section 2. Term. Members shall be appointed to serve three (3) year terms, and In
accordance with Section 2-3 of the City Code, no member shall be appointed to serve
more than three (3) consecutive three-year terms.
Section 3. Qualifications. Each member must be a resident of the district from which he
or she is appointed, and the at-large members must be residents of the City of Virginia
Beach. The appointees shall have knowledge and experience concerning beach and
waterway-relate,d issues.
Section 4. Chair and Vice-Chair. The Chair and Vice-Chair shall be appointed by a
majority vote of the Commission held on the first meeting in July, and shall serve for a
term of one (1) year. The Chair (or Vice-Chair in the Chair's absence) shall preside over
all meetings of the Commission. The Chair and Vice-Chair may be re-appointed for
additional terms.
Section 5. Attendance. Attendance records shall be kept at each meeting of the
Commission and an annual report of the attendance of the members shall be filed with
the City Clerk by June 30 of each year for review by city Council. No member shall
accumulate an annual total of more than three (3) absences (or be absent from more
than one-fourth of the total number of meetings). If this limitation is exceeded from
reasons other than personal illness, death, or other unusual circumstances, the
appointment shall be terminated automatically, or as otherwise prescribed by law.
Members shall be paid $50.00 for each meeting attended.
Section 6. Vacancies. A vacancy caused by death, resignation, termination, expiration,
or otherwise shall be filled by City Council for the unexpired term thereof, or in the case
of an expiration, for three (3) years, within thirty (30) days of said vacancy.
ARTICLE IV
MEETINGS
Section 1. Regular meetings. When the Commission has business it shall meet at least
once a month at a time and location to be determined by the Chair upon consultation
and coordination with the other members.
Section 2. Special meetings. A special meeting may be called by the Chair of three (3)
members of the Commission, or may be convened by City Council, to consider any
matter that, in the determination of the Chair, the members, or the City Council, needs to
be addressed prior to a regular meeting.
Section 3. Requirements. A majority of Commission members shall be present in order
for any official action to be taken. All actions of the Commission shall be conducted at a
regular or special meeting and shall require a majority vote of those members present.
ARTICLE V
REPORTS
Section 1. Annual Report. Within forty-five (45) days of the end of the fiscal year, the
Commission shall prepare, and submit to City Council, an annual report of its activities,
recommendations, and proposals, including a financial statement, if applicable. Interim
reports to City Council may be provided when deemed appropriate or necessary by the
Commission or the Council.
Section 2. Requirements. All reports shall be approved by a majority of the members of
the Commission. In any report to the Council, the Commission shall identify any
conflicts that its report may have with the proposals and/or recommendations of other
City agencies.
ARTICLE VI
COORDINATION
Section 1. City departments. The Commission shall work with and through the
Department of Public Works (''the department") which shall, in close cooperation with
the City Manager's Office, be responsible for coordinating the efforts of the Commission
with other City departments, boards, and commissions to (1) ensure that there is no
unnecessary duplication of efforts; (2) enable the Commission to review the proposals
and recommendations of such other City departments, boards and commissions for
compatibility (or incompatibility) with Commission objectives; and (3) enable such other
City departments, boards and commissions to review and provide comments on
Commission-generated proposals and recommendations.
Section 2. Other agencies. The Commission and the Department shall make a special
effort to establish open lines of communication with other agencies involved in the
review of beach and waterway-related issues.
ARTICLE VII
COMMITTEES
The Chair of the Commission shall have the authority to appoint committees,
comprised of members of the Commission and non-members with special expertise, to
study and review specific areas of concern and to report back to the full Commission for
such action as the Commission may deem appropriate.
ARTICLE VIII
AMENDMENTS
No alteration, amendment, repeal of these Bylaws or any section hereof shall be
effective without the prior consent of City Council.
of
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach on the
,2007
day
r:a.~
<'!o;
.-0.
(. .,~ ~
f5 " '; ''I' .i~
\~~I
~
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM:
Ordinance Authorizing and Directing the City Manager to Execute a Deed
of Release and Exchange Pertaining to an Agricultural Lands Preservation
Easement Located on Land of George B. Pendleton, Jr. and Juanita F.
Pendleton
MEETING DATE: June 26,2007
. Background: On September 13, 2000, George B. Pendleton, Jr. and Juanita F.
Pendleton, the owner of six parcels of land located on Indian Creek Road, placed all six
parcels in the City's Agricultural Reserve Program (ARP). As part of the transaction, the
property owner reserved, for future development, one (1) three-acre building site, known
as the Easement Exception. Mr. and Mrs. Pendleton now desire that the City release
the reserved three acre building site,. shown on Exhibit A as "EXISTING EASEMENT
EXCEPTION BOUNDARY (TO BE VACATED) AREA = 130,678 SQUARE FEET OR
2.999 ACRES", from the ARP Easement in exchange for placing another reserved three
acre site, shown on Exhibit A as "EASEMENT EXCEPTION 133791 SQ. FT. 3.071
ACRES", under the ARP Easement.
. Considerations: The attached plat shows the areas that would be exchanged.
The respective areas overlap and are approximately equal in area. The appraiser who
appraised the property for the original ARP purchase has stated by letter dated May 31,
2007 that there is no difference in the market value of the two sites.
Section 11 of the Agricultural Lands Preservation Ordinance expressly allows
exchanges of the type sought by the applicant and states that the City Council shall
allow such exchanges under certain conditions. Those conditions, which are set forth in
the attached ordinance as findings of the City Council, are as follows:
(1) the acquisition of the proposed Preservation Easement in lieu of the
existing Preservation Easement does not adversely affect the City's interests in
accomplishing the purposes of the Ordinance;
(2) the proposed Preservation Easement area meets all of the eligibility
requirements set forth in Section 7 of the Ordinance;
(3) the land to be encumbered by the proposed Preservation Easement is of
at least equal fair market value, is of greater value as permanent open space, and of as
nearly as feasible equivalent usefulness and location for use as permanent open-space
land as the property on which the existing Preservation Easement is located; and
(4) the consideration for the acquisition of the new Preservation Easement
consists solely of the extinguishment of the existing Preservation Easement.
The proposed ordinance authorizes and directs the City Manager to execute a
Deed of Release and Exchange pursuant to which the 3-acre exception site reserved
for future development is exchanged for another reserved site. Such direction is subject
to the City Attorney's determination that there are no defects in title to the property to be
placed under the ARP Easement or other restrictions or encumbrances thereon which
may, in the opinion of the City Attorney, adversely affect the City's interests.
. Public Information: No special form of advertising is required
. Alternatives: The City Council may deny the proposed exchange if it finds that
the requirements specified above have not been met.
. Recommendations: Adoption of the ordinance allowing the exchange of
reserved sites.
.
Attachments:
Ordinance
Plat
Location Map
Recommended Action: Approval "-
Submitting Department/Agency: Agriculture Department ^ ~
City Manage~ Ii...., '&6~ . ~
1 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING
2 THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A DEED OF
3 RELEASE AND EXCHANGE PERTAINING TO AN
4 AGRICULTURAL LANDS PRESERVATION
5 EASEMENT LOCATED ON LAND OF GEORGE B.
6 PENDLETON, JR. AND JUANITA F. PENDLETON
7
8
9 WHEREAS, on September 13, 2000, the City of Virginia Beach (hereinafter the "City") and
10 George B. Pendleton, Jr. and Juanita F. Pendleton (hereinafter "Pendleton") entered into
11 Installment Purchase Agreement Number 2000-30, whereby the City acquired an Agricultural
12 Lands Preservation Easement (hereinafter "Preservation Easement") upon certain property
13 owned by Pendleton; and
14
15 WHEREAS, as part of the aforesaid transaction, Pendleton reserved for future
16 development a portion of property having an area of 3.000 acres, more or less, such that the
17 Preservation Easement does not encumber the reserved area; and .
18
19 WHEREAS, Pendleton desires to exchange an area of land not encumbered by the
20 Preservation Easement for an equal area of land which is to be encumbered by the Preservation
21 Easement, as shown on the attached plat entitled "AMENDED EXHIBIT SHOWING EASEMENT
22 EXCEPTION ON PROPERTY STANDING IN THE NAME OF GEORGE B. & JUANITA F.
23 PENDLETON JR DB 937 PG 286 FOR CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGRICULTURAL RESERVE
24 PROGRAM VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA" Scale 1" = 40', dated June 5, 2007, and prepared by
25 Digital Survey Services, LLC; and
26
27 WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 11 of the Agricultural Lands Preservation Ordinance
28 (hereinafter "Ordinance"), a landowner may petition the City Council for the extinguishment of a
29 Preservation Easement in exchange for the conveyance to the City of a Preservation Easement
30 on a different portion of the landowner's property, under certain conditions set forth in the
31 Ordinance; and
32
33 WHEREAS, the Ordinance provides that the City Council shall approve such an exchange
34 if it makes certain findings enumerated in the Ordinance; and
35
36 WHEREAS, the City Council does hereby make such findings, to-wit:
37
38 (1) the acquisition of the proposed Preservation Easement in lieu of the existing Preservation
39 Easement does not adversely affect the City's interests in accomplishing the purposes of the
40 Ordinance;
41 (2) the proposed Preservation Easement area meets all of the eligibility requirements set forth
42 in Section 7 of the Ordinance:
1
43 (3) the land to be encumbered by the proposed Preservation Easement is of at least equal fair
44 market value, is of greater value as permanent open space, and of as nearly as feasible
45 equivalent usefulness and location for use as permanent open-space land as the property on
46 which the existing Preservation Easement is located; and
47 (4) the consideration for the acquisition of the new Preservation Easement consists solely of
48 the extinguishment of the existing Preservation Easement.
49
50 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
51 VIRGINIA BEACH:
52
53 That subject to the determination of the City Attorney that there are no defects in title to
54 the property to be placed under the Preservation Easement or other restrictions or
55 encumbrances thereon which may, in the opinion ofthe City Attorney, adversely affect the City's
56 interests, the City Manager be, and hereby is, authorized and directed to execute a Deed of
57 Release and Exchange pursuant to which the City releases the existing Preservation Easement
58 on a portion of the property, as shown on the aforesaid survey, and acquires, in exchange
59 therefore, land equal in area to be placed under the Preservation Easement, as shown on such
60 survey.
61
62 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia. on this _ day of
63 .2007.
CA10312
)(:'ODREAL ESTATE\ARP\BaI.m-Exchange\alpexchangeal'n.doc
R-1
June 18.2007
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL
SUFFICIENCY:
tuwv ~~
City Attorney' Office
2
~
~ t:!fl
~ gri
ffi ~~
2-
1.0.1
~ ~
~
~1(
~I
...CO;
Ill!!:
e~
I'-t:
~~5f
~~~
~ctl~
C.!t~~
~!::a
~(h",
;><~...
~
l.I.. ----__
I
o
a;~
CON
;~
~lll
~"":.
..,..
"'-
-,; ZW
,..;
.I~ ~;:
~ 6.,; <....~!1 ~li:
~ ~ e~ - ~ ~~ ~=
j: ... ~:3t:i ~llloo S8
... l5 !!If "'!o!15'" l!:t::
<,I m ~ ;ii :~i~ ~~
3~ ~<~tJi ~~~~l5!~
\5 i:i \5 ~ ~ ~ s: : ~~ ~\!;
i; i i \5ii :~~!g~
~I !~ial ~Iii~il
< 8 ~ B "'~~....:. 1"'12'" lSi!5
I i ~ = ~ li~I"";~~~1
; II; I :~I! !!i; I~I
~ i~ ~ ~ ;!I~ ;-;161 I~l!;
j !ii~ ~ ~ ~ Iii ~ ~ i 129 ~~8
1j Slll 8 ill ~ i i e Iii ~!1f m~~
~ ~~ ~ ~ ll!i~~ ~!~16G~
..: coJ ..;.= cd cD ,..:
LZ.l St /A .so.6tSO S
a::
-:>
Z
g
C
Z
....0
Q.. _0 I
to.: ?~:;;-
lilOl:l
~ ~ ~~~
:z: ~ -~"It:
~ zal:!l
-, f5C
old
cD
La.J
~
8
t:)
~
!5
lil
;1
slS
i~
VIRGINIA SlAiE ~
COORO\NAiE
~
so\1ltl ZONE
NAD 8~ (86 p.DJ)
..
...-
"'...
t;..;
...'"
"'0
'" .
.",
"''''
...-
~C'i
'"'-
zw
Exhibit A
-"5.Y ~~-
C!>i5:r:eN N
j!!j~Z~~,.l:
"- ~ I ..-I
~ ~::iSi:;;"!~
...~-~ <
~S}~~~ a;
--~]fZ1.__
.6S"az
3 ,11:.st.o1 N
I
'"
~I
I~
012::
..,
w
~~g ~
FZ:::s % ~ ~
~~!i! Co) ~~
t:~F"w<o i:i a.. ~
~W~~l!il m w
xl- "- ::s ~
WZ~~~ 0::3: ...:r
I>l_i:: (l) en 0
ffia05E" ~ll:: ... i:i
Oln~,c'" > 12:: CD
Z<I-::>Q) .....
WI>ll/l"'CD . IS ~ ~
~~~oIIIC ~ 5~
;iffi= u ::> ~
Oo..W ~
iligg f5
D..O ,c
Z~
o
-
ls
?c
III
~
~
'"
~.
...
Ii!
"'. ~.
CD .
is
a;;
'"
~ ~
S I
iE lil
-
~ '"
~
. a:::
ill ... t
... ~8 I b
~
~ N . I"")
. ..,
fit ~ 8 .........~
co
:z ~ ~~
if o~
'" S- a:::-
z
:::; I cD
CSa
~ ~ I UJ
lL~ a:::
li! ! u
lL
:z
:$;
0
:z
81~
~I
~r
g
hi
~...~
!!i
el/!!ii! 1::
~~i5f13
l!!8~~~
'" "'...
~~emd
'Q'
Ii!
~
III
l~
~~
~.!S
~~
~
~1a
lafu
I:i~
a !l!
~ ~ !
'"
@I
~ ~
~ ~
i
I
o
LOCATION MAP
Blackwater Road,\
;
p,.,,~
,>
;,\
j.(
:l.
i
'-"~l~;f-"<~~<.\
~
~
~
Q)
~
U
~
]
-
.-Z
Q)
bO
~
-5
~
Q)
t::
o
.-&
Q)
Q
~
Q)
+->
t::
Q)
E
Q)
r/l
~
Q)
t::
o
+->
Q)
;a
t::
Q)
~
CO
;c::i
\S!l
1-(1)
(1)0:::
a.. ~~
<( o:r: N
'lIl:I::: W "CD
.::::. 0::: <( ~
(ZO~~c58
Wo::: I N
_ W .....
~ :E~~
U nON ~
o <(~z
-' 0 LL" Q.
0::: C> 0
UO
z-
W~
o
- ~
g: i;
ou.. ::0-
o "l:l
"Ot Q)
~
~
~
.f;
Q)
2
~
tl
Gl
:l:
~
!
.!!
ii:
(,)
~
y
.e-
g.
x
""
~
~
....
;:,
Gl
!!
;:,
II)
(j)
8
~
U)
Q) ~
> 0
<( B:
-E' >- ~
Q)"'tJ .
a. Q) g-
o C II:!
"- C .
0.. ~ g-
"0 8 8 ~
~ DI~ i
...J G
~
Q.
..
._~
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: An Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into a portion of City
property known as Lake Rudee located at the rear of 700 Kennedy Avenue, for
the adjacent property owners, David F. and Jerry A. Harris, their heirs, assigns
and successors in title.
MEETING DATE: June 26, 2007
. Background:
Mr. and Mrs. Harris request permission to remove an existing float, ramp, and
pier and to construct and maintain a proposed float, ramp, and fixed pier at the
rear of 700 Kennedy Avenue in Lake Rudee.
This item was under review prior to Council direction regarding landscape buffer
as a condition of granting approval for encroachments adjacent to waterways.
. Considerations:
City Staff has reviewed the request for the existing encroachments and has
recommended approval of the removal of an existing float, ramp, and pier and to
construct and maintain a proposed float, ramp, and fixed pier, subject to certain
conditions outlined in the agreement.
There are similar encroachments in Lake Rudee, which is where Mr. and Mrs.
Harris have requested to encroach.
. Public Information:
Advertisement of City Council Agenda
. Alternatives:
Approve the encroachments as presented, deny the encroachments, or add
conditions as desired by Council.
. Recommendations:
Approve the request subject to the terms and conditions of the agreement.
. Attachments:
Ordinance, Location Map, Agreement, Plat and Pictures.
Recommended Action:
Approval of the ordinance.
Submitting Department/Agency: Public Works/Real Estate p ~ c Ptl)
City Manage. k ,~()Pt
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
Requested by Department of Public Works
AN ORDINANCE TO AUTHORIZE
TEMPORARY ENCROACHMENTS INTO
CITY PROPERTY KNOWN AS LAKE
RUDEE LOCATED AT THE REAR OF
700 KENNEDY AVENUE FOR THE
ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS,
DAVID F. HARRIS AND JERRY A.
HARRIS, THEIR HEIRS, ASSIGNS
AND SUCCESSORS IN TITLE
WHEREAS, David S. Harris and Jerry A. Harris desire to
remove an existing float, ramp, and pier and to construct and
maintain a proposed float, fixed pier, and ramp, upon City
property located at the rear of 700 Kennedy Avenue upon and into
the City property known as Lake Rudee.
WHEREAS, City Council is authorized pursuant
2009 and 15.2-2107, Code of Virginia, 1950, as
authorize temporary encroachments upon and into
property subj ect to such terms and conditions as
prescribe.
to ~~ 15.2-
amended, to
the City's
Council may
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:
That pursuant to the authority and to the extent thereof
contained in ~~ 15.2-2009 and 15.2-2107, Code of Virginia, 1950,
as amended, David S. Harris and Jerry A. Harris, their heirs,
assigns and successors in title are authorized to remove an
existing float, ramp, and pier and to construct and maintain a
proposed float, fixed pier, and ramp, into the City's property
as shown on the map entitled: "PROPOSED ENCROACHMENT FOR DAVID
F. & JERRY A. HARRI SLOT 22, BLOCK 40, 700 KENNEDY AVENUE
SHADOWLAWN HEIGHTS BEACH DISTRICT, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA", a
copy of which is on file in the Department of Public Works and
to which reference is made for a more particular description;
and
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED, that the temporary encroachments
are expressly subject to those terms, conditions and criteria
contained in the Agreement between the City of Virginia Beach
and David F. Harris and Jerry A. Harris (the "Agreement"), which
is attached hereto and incorporated by reference; and
.1 '^
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
BE IT FURTHER
authorized designee
Agreement; and
ORDAINED, that the City
is hereby authorized
his
the
Manager or
to execute
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED, that this Ordinance shall not be in
effect until such time as David F. Harris and Jerry A. Harris
and the City Manager or his authorized designee execute the
Agreement.
Adopted by the
Virginia, on the
Council
day of
City of Virginia
, 2007.
Beach,
of the
CA9623
X:\OIDIREAL ESTA 'fEIEncroachmentsIPW Ordinanccs\CA9623 Ranis OrcliDance.doc
V:\applicationslcitylawprodlcycom32\ Wpdocs\D0301POO2\OOO32381.DOC
R-1
PREPARED: 5/1/07
APPROVED AS TO CONTENTS
iiftffOO C. ~4-.
P REAL ESTATE
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL
SUFFICIENCY AND FORM
.n
~ff~
CITY ATTORNEY
. \/"\
PREPARED BY VIRGINIA BEACH
CITY A TIORNEY'S OFFICE
EXEMPTED FROM RECORDA nON TAXES
UNDER SECTION 58.1-811(C) (4)
THIS AGREEMENT, made this 4th day of
May
, 2007, by and
between the CITY" OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA, a municipal corporation of the
Commonwealth of Virginia, Grantor, "City", and DAVID F. HARRIS AND JERRY A.
HARRIS, THEIR HEIRS, ASSIGNS AND SUCCESSORS IN TITLE, "Grantee", even though
more than one.
WIT N E SSE T H:
That, WHEREAS, the Grantee is the owner of that certain lot, tract, or parcel of
land designated and described as Lot 22, Block 40, as shown on that certain plat entitled "MAP
OF SHADOW LAWN HEIGHTS VIRGINIA BEACH PRINCESS ANNE CO" and recorded in
Map Book 7, Page 14 in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach,
Virginia, and being further designated and described as 700 Kennedy A venue, Virginia Beach,
Virginia 23451;
WHEREAS, it is proposed by the Grantee to remove an existing float, ramp, and
pier and to construct and maintain a float, ramp, and fixed pier, the "Temporary Encroachment",
in the City of Virginia Beach;
WHEREAS, in constructing and maintaining the Temporary Encroachment, it is
necessary that the Grantee encroach into a portion of existing City property known as Lake
Rudee, the "Encroachment Area"; and
GPIN (CITY PROPERTY - NO GPIN)
2427-01-5392
I..
WHEREAS, .the Grantee has requested that the City permit the Temporary
Encroachment within the Encroachment Area.
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the premises and of the benefits
accruing or to accrue to the Grantee and for the further consideration of One Dollar ($1.00), in
hand paid to the City, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the City hereby grants to the
Grantee permission to use the Encroachment Area for the purpose of constructing and
maintaining the Temporary Encroachment.
It is expressly understood and agreed that the Temporary Encroachment will be
constructed and maintained in accordance with the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia and
the City of Virginia Beach, and in accordance with the City's specifications and approval and is
more particularly described as follows, to ~t:
A Temporary Encroachment into the Encroachment Area as shown
on that certain plat entitled: "PROPOSED ENCROACHMENT
FOR DAVID F. & JERRY A. HARRIS LOT 22, BLOCK 40, 700
KENNEDY AVENUE SHADOWLA WN HEIGHTS BEACH
DISTRICT, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA," a copy of which is
attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and to which reference is made for a
more particular description.
Providing however, nothing herein shall prohibit the City from immediately
removing, or ordering the Grantee to remove, all or any part of the Temporary Encroachment
from the Encroachment Area in the event of an emergency or public necessity, and Grantee shall
bear all costs and expenses of such removal.
It is further expressly understood and agreed that the Temporary Encroachment
herein authorized terminates upon notice by the City to the Grantee, and that within thirty (30)
days after the notice is given, the Temporary Encroachment must be removed from the
2
i-t,f)
Encroachment Area by the Grantee; and that the Grantee will bear all costs and expenses of such
removal.
It is further expressly understood and agreed that the Grantee shall indemnify and
hold harmless the City, its agents and employees, from and against. all claims, damages, losses
and expenses, induding reasonable attorney's fees, in case it shall be necessary to file or defend
an action arising out of the construction, location or existence of the Temporary Encroachment.
It is further expressly understood and agreed that nothing herein contained shall
be construed to enlarge the permission and authority to permit the maintenance or construction of
any encroachment other than that specified herein and to the limited extent specified herein, nor
to permit the maintenance and construction of any encroachment by anyone other than the
Grantee.
It is further expressly understood and agreed that the Grantee agrees to maintain
the Temporary Encroachment so as not to become unsightly or a hazard.
It is further expressly understood and agreed that the Grantee must obtain a permit
from the Office of Planning Department prior to commencing any construction within the
Encroachment Area.
It is further expressly understood and agreed that the Grantee must obtain and
keep in force all..risk property insurance and genera11iabi1ity or such insurance as is deemed
necessary by the City, and all insurance policies must name the City as additional named insured
or loss payee, as applicable. The Grantee also agrees to carry comprehensive general liability
insurance in an amount not less than $500,000.00, combined single limits of such insurance
policy or policies. The Grantee will provide endorsements providing at least thirty (30) days
written notice to the City prior to the cancellation or termination of, or material change to, any of
3
the insurance policies. The Grantee assumes all responsibilities and liabilities, vested or
contingent, with relation to the construction, location, and/or existence of the Temporary
Encroachment.
It is further expressly understood and agreed that the Temporary Encroachment
must conform to the minimum setbacks requirements, as established by the City.
It is further expressly understood and agreed that the Grantee must submit for
review and approval, a survey of The Encroachment Area, certified by a registered professional
engineer or a licensed land surveyor, and/or "as built" plans of the Temporary Encroachment
sealed by a registered professional engineer, if required by either the City Engineer's Office or
the Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department.
It is further expressly understood and agreed that the City, upon revocation of
such authority and permission so granted, may remove the Temporary Encroachment and charge
the cost thereof to the Grantee, and collect the cost in any manner provided by law for the
collection of local or state taxes; may require the Grantee to remove the Temporary
Encroachment; and pending such removal, the City may charge the Grantee for the use of the
Encroachment Area, the equivalent of what would be the real property tax upon the land so
occupied if it were owned by the Grantee; and if such removal shall not be made within the time
ordered hereinabove by this Agreement, the City may impose a penalty in the sum of One
Hundred Dollars ($100.00) per day for each and every day that the Temporary Encroachment is
allowed to continue thereafter, and may collect such compensation and penalties in any manner
provided by law for the collection of local or state taxes.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, David F. Harris and Jerry A. Harris, the said Grantee,
have caused this Agreement to be executed by their signatures. Further, that the City of Virginia
4
, .
Beach has caused this Agreement to be executed in its name and on its behalf by its City
Manager and its seal be hereunto affixed and attested by its City Clerk.
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
By
City Manager/Authorized
Designee of the City Manager
(SEAL)
ATTEST:
City Clerk
STATE OF VIRGINIA
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
day of
, 2007, by
, CITY MANAGER/AUTHORIZED
DESIGNEE OF THE CITY MANAGER.
Notary Public
My. Commission Expires:
5
STATE OF VIRGINIA
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
day of
,2007, by RUTH HODGES FRASER, City Clerk for the CITY OF VIRGINIA
BEACH.
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
STATE OF VIRGINIA
CITY/COUNTY OF V (Jr1::J~ , to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this LI-~ day of
~ 2007, by David F. Harris.
~~
Notary Public
My Commission Expires: .5 ~O 10
STATE OF VIRGINIA
CITY/COUNTY OF ~, to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~ day of
,,),to' 2007, by Jerry A Harris.
~~
Notary Public
My Commission Expires: 61st\ a. a , 0
,
6
APPROVED AS TO CONTENTS
'f)nrm~s C .~~e\.......
SIGNATURE
f1,) KEAJ &.M~
DEPARTMENT
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL
SUFFICIENCY AND FORM
~~
~~UMIN
X:\Projects\Encroachments\Applicants\Hanis, David F. Lake Rudee RAB-KMJ\Agreement Encroachmentl.doc
7
EXHIBIT "A"
~,.
~;.~
~Q~v-
UNE
L1
L2
1.3
L4
L5
L6
L7
L8
1.9.
L10
L11
L12
L13
~
/ (1'.
~
tol
/ x';:' ('1,1 C
>.00 co
W ffi I ~ ~EXIST DOCK
~:E~c; .-
::)~~a..~y
ex: Ii.. C) _ ....
IE! .'-
wG:S; ......~
50 IL .('1,1
.m
~o ::i"
~l:cq-f
uB C)
REF 1
k.fS
B: 115'
C: 124'
0: 123'
REF 2
k.9'Z
B: 108'
C: 125'
0: 115'
LOT 22
24274)1-5392
(O.B. 1468, PG. 29)
I CYPRESSAVENUE ....
(50") -I
(M.B. 7, PG. 14)
~""\ L12
CLOSED PORTION OF KENNEDY AVENUE ~. ~""\
(KENNEDY 1) (O.B. 1739, PG. 29)<:>. ~~ ~ 0
-I ~
N7tr06'12"E 145.00' q~
Q.OSED PORTION OF KENNEDY AVENUE
GPlN:2427-o1-5471
KENNEDY 2
(M.B. 124, PG. 19)
engineering services. inc.
COM1 Engineeri~ - Land Surveying
3351 St0nesh0r8 Road, 'lirginicl Beach, VA. 23452
(757) 468-6800 FAX (757) 468-4966
E-maD: emailOesiolva.com
Pro. eet Scale: Drown B Po e:
93028 1--JO' JLR 1 OF 1
Dote
03/09/07
~""\
~~
UNE TABLE
LENGTH
25.00
21.72
18.34
12.75
14.38
13.02
26.30
13.98
20.17
5.14
8.87
10.00
25.00
BEARING
S13"53' 48"E
N76"06'12"E
S08"27'33"E
SOX3O'OS"W
526"56'25 "W
544-53'01 "W
S56"56'53"W
S83"07~13"W
N52'27'38"W
SBT35'04"W
N21r44'40"W
S76"06'12"W
N 13"53' 48"W
I PROPERlY UNE
t----' SCALED FROM M.B.
PG. 14
l&J
.
~ -
. 0
~ 0
10 .
",i
....
rn
PROPOSED ENCROACHMENT
FOR
DAVID F. & JERRY A. HARRIS
LOT 22, BLOCK 40. 700 KENNEDY AVENUE
SHADOWlAWN HEIGHTS
BEACH DISTRICT. VIRGINIA BEACH. VIRGINIA
Drawin
It
Nome
~SIe
fJeFbl
Ii. L
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: An Ordinance to Grant Permits Allowing Certain Emergency Medical Services
Agencies to Operate in the City of Virginia Beach
MEETING DATE: June 26,2007
. Background: State law and City Code Section 10.5-2 require any organization
that operates an emergency medical services agency or any emergency medical
services vehicle within the city to obtain a permit from City Council. Such permits
must be renewed by City Council annually.
. Considerations: Permits previously granted by City Council to the following
entities will expire on June 30, 2007: American Lifeline Medical Transport,
Children's Hospital of the King's Daughters, Life Evac of Virginia Air Medical
Transport, Medical Transport, Network Medical Systems, Lifeline Ambulance
Service, Eastern Shore Ambulance Service, and Nightingale Air Ambulance.
These agencies perform services not provided by the City's volunteer rescue
squads, such as non-emergency inter-facility transports. The Department of
Emergency Medical Services has reviewed the renewal applications of each
entity and recommends that Council adopt the attached resolution, which will
renew the permits for another year.
. Public Information: Public information will be handled through the normal
Council agenda process.
. Attachments: Ordinance
Recommended Action: Adoption
Submitting Department/Agency: Department of Emergency Medical Services ~
City Manager: 0 k.. · ~~
1 AN ORDINANCE TO GRANT PERMITS ALLOWING
2 CERTAIN EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES
3 AGENCIES TO OPERATE IN THE CITY OF VIRGINIA
4 BEACH
5
6 WHEREAS, pursuant to City Code Section 10.5-2, any organization that operates
7 an emergency medical services agency or any emergency medical services vehicle within
8 the City must first obtain a permit from City Council, and such permits must be renewed on
9 an annual basis; and
10
11 WHEREJ.l\S, applications for permit renewals have been received by the following
12 agencies: Amerk;an Lifeline Medical Transport, Children's Hospital of the King's Daughters,
13 Life Evac of Virginia Air Medical Transport, Medical Transport, Network Medical Systems,
14 Lifeline Ambulance Service, Eastern Shore Ambulance Service, and Nightingale Air
15 Ambulance; and
16
17 WHEREJ.l\S, the above-listed private ambulance agencies perform services not
18 provided by the City's volunteer rescue squads, such as non-emergency inter-facility
19 transports, which include both basic and advance life support calls.
20
21 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BYTHE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
22 VIRGINIA BEACH;
23
24 1. That the City Council hereby grants Emergency Medical Services permits to the
25 following agenci1es:
26
27 American Lifeline Medical Transport, Children's Hospital of the King's Daughters,
28 Life Evac of Virginia Air Medical Transport, Medical Transport, Network Medical
29 Systems, Lifeline Ambulance Service, Eastern Shore Ambulance Service, and
30 Nightingale Air Ambulance.
31
32 2. That these permits shall be effective from July 1, 2007 until June 30, 2008.
of
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on this
,2007.
day
J Lj::.- '~
Emergency Medical Services
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY:
~~-~
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
CA 10434
R-3
June 20, 2007
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: An Ordinance Appointing Three (3) Viewers for One-Year Terms Beginning July
1 , 2007, to View Each Street or Alley Proposed to be Closed
MEETING DATE: June 26, 2007
. Background: Pursuant to authority granted to the City of Virginia Beach by the
General Assembly during its 1997 Session, City Council, by ordinance adopted June
23, 1998, added 9 33-111.2 to the City Code, which provides for the appointment of
three (3) viewers for one-year terms, beginning July 1 of each year, to view each and
every street or alley proposed to be altered or vacated during the term of such viewers.
. Considerations: Because the terms of the current viewers expire on June 30,
2007, it is necessary to appoint viewers for one-year terms beginning July 1,2007.
. Public Information: This ordinance is to be advertised as a routine agenda
item.
. Attachments: Ordinance
Recommended Action: Approval
Submitting Department/Agency: Department of Planning
City Manager:~~ k ,~~
1 AN ORDINANCE APPOINTING THREE (3) VIEWERS FOR
2 ONE-YEAR TERMS BEGINNING JULY 1, 2007, TO VIEW
3 EACH STREET OR ALLEY PROPOSED TO BE CLOSED
4
5 WHEREAS, Section 33-11.2 of the City Code provides that "[t]hree (3) viewers
6 shall be appointE3d each year to serve terms of one year beginning July 1 to view each
7 and every street or alley proposed to be altered or vacated during the term;" and
8
9 WHEREAS, it is the desire of City Council to appoint the Directors of the
10 Departments of Planning, Public Works and Parks and Recreation to serve as viewers
11 for one-year terms, beginning July 1, 2007 and ending June 30, 2008.
12
13 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
14 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:
15
16 That the Director of Planning, Director of Public Works and Director of Parks and
17 Recreation of the City of Virginia Beach are each hereby appointed as a viewer to serve
18 a one-year term beginning July 1, 2007 and ending June 30, 2008, to view each and
19 every application to close a street or alley, and to report in writing their opinion of what
20 inconvenience, if any, would result from discontinuing the street or alley or portion
21 thereof.
Adopted Iby the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia on the
day of , 2007.
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL
SUFFICIENCY:
.::e~ F
City Attorney's Offl
CA 10445
R-1
June 20, 2007
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: An Ordinance to Establish CIP #2-166, Pacific Avenue Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety,
and to Accept and Appropriate a $63,450 Grant from the Virginia Department of
Transportation to Install Pedestrian Signs and Flashing Lights Along Pacific Avenue
Between 5th and 43rd Streets
MEETING DATE: June 26, 2007
. Background: Pacific Avenue is a four-lane arterial road serving as main north/south
access to the north end of the city. Over 5,400 pedestrians cross Pacific Avenue between 5th
Street and 43rd Street daily on a year-round basis to access the beaches, restaurants, night
clubs and hotels. However, during the summer that number increases to 20,000-28,000
pedestrians daily. There are seven signals along this corridor at 5th, 9th, 17th, 21 st, 24th, 31 st,
and 43rd Streets, and all have an exclusive pedestrian phase. However, because this roadway
section is two miles long, many pedestrians choose to cross the street in areas where there is
no signal protection. This project will provide additional pedestrian crossing warning signs with
flashing lights. Initial funding for the project has been provided through a grant from the Federal
Highway Administration under the VDOT Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Program.
. Considerations: Due to pedestrian fatalities and requests from area residents, Public
Works investigated the pedestrian activity along Pacific Avenue between 5th and 43rd streets. It
was determined that large "Pedestrian Crossing - next two miles" warning signs with flashing
lights would help educate drivers that many pedestrians cross Pacific Avenue to access hotels,
shops, and public beaches. Solar powered flashing lights along this section of Pacific Avenue
would mitigate potential conflicts between pedestrians and motor vehicles. They could be
installed at a minimal cost, and would not require the purchasing of rights-of-way. The amount
of the initial grant from VDOT totals $63,540. The current cost estimate prepared by Traffic
Engineering/Public Works for the design and construction of this project totals $71,000.
Therefore, $7,460 in contributed staff time will be provided as an in-kind match for this project.
This project is programmed to achieve the City's goal for pedestrian safety improvement along
Pacific Avenue.
. Public Information: This project has been coordinated with the Resort Advisory
Commission.
. Recommendations: City Council adopt the attached ordinance to accept and appropriate
VDOT Grant in the amount of $63,450 to install pedestrian signs with flashing lights.
. Attachments: Ordinance, Location Maps (Exhibit A & B)
Recommended Action: Approval of attached Ordinance
Submitting Department/Agency: Public Works / Traffic Engineering ~ fT~
City Manage. 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
AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH CIP #2-166, PACIFIC
AVENUE BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY, AND TO
ACCEPT AND APPROPRIATEA$63,450 GRANT FROM THE
VIHGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO
INSTALL PEDESTRIAN SIGNS AND FLASHING LIGHTS
ALONG PACIFIC AVENUE BETWEEN 5TH AND 43RD
STHEETS
WHEREAS, a Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Grant totaling $63,450 from the
Virginia Department of Transportation is available to be accepted and appropriated to CIP
#2-166, Pacific Avenue Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety, to install pedestrian signs with
flashing lights along Pacific Avenue between 5th and 43rd Streets;
WHEREAS, $7,460 in contributed staff time will be provided as an in-kind match for
this project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:
That CIP #2-166, Pacific Avenue Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety is hereby
established as a capital project.
That a $63,540 grant from the Virginia Department of Transportation is accepted
and appropriated to CIP #2-166 to install pedestrian signs with flashing lights along Pacific
Avenue between 5th and 43rd Streets, with estimated revenues increased accordingly.
Requires ,an affirmative vote by a majority of the members of the City Council.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the
,2007.
day of
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY:
;::e~
City Attorney's Office[-
CA 10436
R-2
June 14, 2007
EXHIBIT A: PACIfIC AVENUE
FROM 5th STREET
TO 24th STREET
an.........-.aI
1lI:PT._1'WLIC__
o
0tSCL.AIMER: thedm. provicIed ~a is. and the City of VeroN Beadl ~ discIIIirns......,...... UCC, Md oIherwiIe, express or irI'lpr.d including per5cuIw purpcIM,.nd fur1her ~
~. fMPQMibiIityfor... incldentaI. consequential or IpKiaI ct.n1lQM ariaftg out of or in connedion with the use or P8'f0nMnce otu. d*- The user acknowIecIges. the cr~ of wcranty
.. _. _ __."__ ______~__._~~_..._~~__._~______._'__...._"..._'__......."'O_"_~'__'_'__I __.'-...1_..-0..1 -:............;vI_in~iNoowitt.tMl_ty~ofthllct.la.
EXHIBIT B: PACIFIC AVENUE
FROM 24th STREET
TO 43rd STREET
OISCLAIMER: The dN is ~ -.. is" and the City ofVwginili Beach ~ dilclliims" wwrW1\ies. UCC, and othMw*M. e1q)NU or impr.d..eIuding ~ purpoM. Met fur1tIer~
dIadIiims~for"'incidemal.~~_orapecialdam~~outof~n.~~with~~or~~!'O"of.lh!~._~_~~_~~~~~
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: An Ordinance to Establish CIP #2-163, Shore Drive Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety, and
to Accept and Appropriate a $36,288 Grant from the Virginia Department of
Transportation to Install Pedestrian Signs and Flashing Lights Along Shore Drive
Between Kendall Street and Vista Circle
MEETING DATE: June 26,2007
. Background: Shore Drive is a four-lane arterial road serving as the main east/west
access to the north end of the city. Over 300-400 pedestrians cross Shore Drive between
Kendall Street and Vista Circle daily on a year-round basis to access the beaches, restaurants,
night clubs and hotels. However, during the summer that number increases to 600-1,100
pedestrians per day. There are four signals along this corridor at N. Great Neck Road, W. Great
Neck Road, Starfish Road and Vista Circle. In addition, the signal at Starfish Road has an
exclusive pedestrian phase. However, because this roadway section is one-and-one-half miles
long, many pedestrians choose to cross the street in areas where there is no signal protection.
This project will provide additional pedestrian crossing warning signs with flashing lights. Initial
funding for the project has been provided through a grant from the Federal Highway
Administration under the VDOT Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Program.
. Considerations: Due to pedestrian fatalities and requests from area residents, Public
WorksfTraffic Engineering Division investigated the pedestrian activity along Shore Drive
between Kendall Street and Vista Circle. It was determined that large "Pedestrian Crossing -
next 1.5 miles" warning signs with flashing lights would help educate drivers that many
pedestrians cross this section of Shore Drive as shown on the attached Exhibit A - Shore Drive
from Kendall Street and Vista Circle. Solar powered flashing lights along this section of Shore
Drive would mitigate potential conflicts between pedestrians and motor vehicles. They could be
installed at a minimal cost, and would not require the purchasing of rights-of-way. The amount
of the initial grant from VDOT totals $36,288. The current cost estimate prepared by Public
WorksfTraffic Engineering Division for the design and construction of this project totals $40,320.
Therefore, $4,032 in contributed staff time will be provided as an in-kind match for this project.
This project is programmed to help achieve the City's goal for pedestrian safety improvement
along Shore Drive.
. Public Information: The project has been coordinated with and endorsed by the Baytront
Advisory Committee (formerly known as the Shore Drive Advisory Committee), and is based on
input from the community.
. Recommendations: City Council adopt the attached ordinance to accept and appropriate
VDOT Grant in the amount of $36,288 to install pedestrian signs with flashing lights.
. Attachments: Ordinance, Location Map (Exhibit A)
Recommended Action: Approval of Attached Ordinance
Submitting DepartmentlAge1~Y: Public WorksfTraffic Engineering
City Manager~ L G31JY>1z
~j\~
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
AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH CIP#2-163, SHORE DRIVE
BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY, AND TO ACCEPT
AND APPROPRIATE A $36,288 GRANT FROM THE VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO INSTALL
PEDESTRIAN SIGNS AND FLASHING LIGHTS ALONG
SHORE DRIVE BETWEEN .KENDALL STREET AND VISTA
CIRCLE
WHEREAS, a Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Grant totaling $36,288 from the
Virginia Department of Transportation is available to be accepted and appropriated to CIP
#2-163, Shore Drive Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety, to install pedestrian signs with flashing
lights along Shore Drive between Kendall Street and Vista Circle;
WHEREAS, $4,032 in contributed staff time will be provided as an in-kind match for
this project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:
That CIP #2-163, Shore Drive Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety is hereby established
as a capital project.
That a $3,6,288 grant from the Virginia Department of Transportation is accepted
and appropriated to CIP #2-163 to install pedestrian signs with flashing lights along Shore
Drive between Kendall Street and Vista Circle, with estimated revenues increased
accordingly.
Requires an affirmative vote by a majority of the members of the City Council.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the
,2:007.
day of
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY:
.~~
,
e~rvices
;:e~F-
City Attorney's Offic
CA 10435
R-2
June 14, 2007
x
~
i
~
'"
C">
...
r
~
I
!j'
~
~'
~
~
!?
~
Q.
11m
7:) x
OJ:
d3:~
<7'li:H
Hm-l
(flZ~
-i ..
~g(fl
("'),J:
H'O
7:)(fl7:)
("')-Im
'7:)(7
mm7:)
mH
-1<
m
-
N
8
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: An Ordinance to Appropriate $322,999 from the State Compensation Board and
$235,479 from the Fund Balance of the Sheriff's Department Special Revenue Fund to
the Department of Sheriff and Corrections' FY 2007-08 Operating Budget to Provide
Funding to Advance to July 1, 2007 the 4% State Pay Increases for Uniformed Sheriff's
Personnel
MEETING DATE: June 26 2007
. Background: The State budget included a 4% increase in the deputies' "Compensation
Board" salary effective December 1, 2007. The City provides funding for salary supplements as
authorized by City Council for 100% City authorized positions and as a match for State
positions. This funding is held in the City's salary reserve and is transferred as needed for this
support. The Sheriff proposes accelerating the State funded increase to July 1, 2007, using the
Fund Balance from Sheriff's Department Special Revenue Fund. This use is a one-time use of
Fund Balance because State revenue will cover the on-going cost. As such, it does not violate
the City Council policy on use of Fund Balance.
. Considerations: The additional revenue from the State Compensation Board related to
the December 1st salary increase is $322,999. In order to advance the salary increase from
December 1st to July 1st, an appropriation of $235,479 is needed from the Fund Balance of the
Sheriff's Department Special Revenue Fund.
A total of $456,545 has been appropriated with the FY 2007-08 Operating Budget and has been
set aside in a dedicated reserve to provide the City's portion of the anticipated state increase.
This funding also allows the City to supplement deputy pay bands to 90% of the pay range of
city police positions. It will be transferred to the Department as supplementary funding as
needed.
. Public Information: Public information will be handled through the normal agenda
process.
. Recommendations: Appropriate $322,999 in additional revenue from the State
Compensation Board to the Sheriff's FY2007-08 Operating Budget for a 4% salary increase for
uniformed positions. Appropriate $235,479 from the Fund Balance of the Sheriff's Department
Special Revenue Fund to advance the 4% pay increases provided by the state to July 1,2007.
. Attachments:. Ordinance
Recommended Action: Approval
Submitting Department/Agency: Department of Sheriff and Corrections
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
AN ORDINANCE TO APPROPRIATE $322,999 FROM
THE STATE COMPENSATION BOARD AND $235,479
FROM THE FUND BALANCE OF THE SHERIFF'S
DEPARTMENT SPECIAL REVENUE FUND TO THE
DEPARTMENT OF SHERIFF AND CORRECTIONS'
FY 2007-08 OPERATING BUDGET TO PROVIDE
FUNDING TO ADVANCE TO JULY 1, 2007 THE 4%
STATE PAY INCREASES FOR UNIFORMED
SHERIFF'S PERSONNEL
WHEREAS, the Sheriff has requested the use of Fund Balance from the Sheriff's
Department Special Revenue Fund to advance to July 1, 2007 the 4% pay raises for
uniform personnel granted by the State Compensation Board that is effective December
1, 2007;
WHEREAS, this request qualifies for the use of fund balance because state
revenue provides the on-going support beginning in December 2007;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:
1. That $322,999 is hereby accepted and appropriated from the State
Compensation Board to the Department of Sheriff and Corrections' FY 2007-08
Operating Budget to fund pay raises for Sheriff's employees, with state revenue
increased accordingly.
2. That $235,479 is hereby appropriated from the Fund Balance of the
Sheriff's Department Special Revenue Fund to the Department of Sheriff and
Corrections' FY 2007-08 Operating Budget to provide one-time funding to advance the
4% pay raises for uniform personnel to July 1, 2007, with local revenue increased
accordingly.
3. That $456,545 that has been set aside in a dedicated reserve in the
General Fund for pay increases is hereby transferred as needed to the Sheriff's
Department's Special Revenue Fund to the Department of Sheriff and Correction's FY
2007-08 Operating Budget to fund the fringe benefit and increases to the salary
supplement portion of the pay increases for Sheriff's personnel.
Requires an affirmative vote by a majority of the members of the City Council.
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:
R~~
City Attorney's Offic
CA 10438
R-2
June 14, 2007
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: An Ordinance to Appropriate $300,000 in Earned Revenue to the Virginia
Aquarium Special Revenue Fund
MEETING DATE: June 26, 2007
. Background: The Virginia Aquarium & Marine Science Center, a special
revenue fund, earns most of the revenue necessary to fund its operating
expenditures. During FY 2007 the Aquarium opened the successful temporary
exhibit Penguins: Birds of Play, and opened three popular full-feature length
IMAX@ films. This has resulted in a 7% increase in year-to-date admission
revenue and a 10% increase in year-to-date Aquarium Store revenue.
Accordingly, Aquarium earned revenues are projected to exceed budgeted
appropriations by $300,000 by the end of FY 2007.
. Considerations: The cost of these strategic initiatives has resulted in increased
film costs, marketing costs and cost of goods sold. The Virginia Aquarium &
Marine Science Center requests City Council appropriate an additional $300,000
in earned revenue.
. Public Information: The public will be informed through the normal agenda
process.
. Alternatives: If additional revenues are not appropriated, the Aquarium will
have to reduce expenditures.
. Recommendations: Appropriate $300,000 in additional revenues to the Virginia
Aquarium Special Revenue Fund.
. Attachments: Ordinance
Recommended Action: Approval
Submitting Department/Agency: Department of Museums
City Manager: t ,~~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
AN ORDINANCE TO APPROPRIATE $300,000 IN
EARNED REVENUE TO THE VIRGINIA AQUARIUM
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND
WHEREAS, revenues earned through Aquarium admissions, Aquarium stores
and memberships are projected to exceed the budgeted appropriation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:
That $300,000 in earned revenue is hereby appropriated to the Virginia Aquarium
Special Revenue Fund with revenue from Charges for Services increased accordingly.
Requires an affirmative vote by a majority of the members of the City Council.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the
_' 2007.
day
of
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL
SUFFICIENCY:
~~~
R~ &==
City Attorney's Offic
CA 10437
R-2
June 14, 2007
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: An Ordinance to Accept and Appropriate $29,983 from a Cash-in-Lieu-of-Park-
Reservation-Payment from the Eagle Cove Subdivision to Capital Improvement Program
Project 4-023, "Neighborhood Park Acquisition and Development - Phase II"
MEETING DATE: June 26, 2007
. Background: The Eagle Cove development (Planning/DSC file # E12-606) is a
relatively small, 25-lot single-family residential infill subdivision that is not large enough to
require a large park dedication. City Council adopted a policy in 1995 to allow for cash
payments in lieu of park reservations, particularly when park land dedications would be less
than one acre in size. The subject development would yield a park dedication of .40 acres,
significantly less than the 1 to 5 acre minimum size preferred for a neighborhood park. In this
case, both staff and the developer agree that a cash payment in lieu of park reservation may be
the most appropriate option for addressing the subdivision's recreational impact. The payment
would be allocated toward improving a City park within the Indian River Road/Elbow Road
corridor.
. Considerations: Representatives of the Eagle Cove subdivision have agreed to the
Cash-in-Lieu-of-Park-Reservation Payment in accordance with City Council policy (attached).
The amount of the payment is based on the .40 acre dedication requirement of the subdivision
multiplied by the assessed value per acre of the entire site ($74,958), as determined by the Real
Estate Assessor. The dedication requirement of .40 acre x $74,958 = $29,983 cash payment in
lieu of park reservation.
. Public Information: Public information will be handled through the normal City Council
agenda process. In addition, the Eagle Cove subdivision plans for the proposed development
were processed through the administrative procedures of the Department of
PlanninglDevelopment Service Centers and are therefore accessible for public review.
. Alternatives: There are three options for addressing recreational/open space
requirements for residential subdivisions that have appropriate zoning: park/open space
reservation, park/open space dedication, or a cash payment in lieu of park reservation payment.
City Council may require the developer of the Eagle Cove subdivision to reserve or dedicate
parkland/open space instead of making the cash payment.
. Recommendations: Accept and appropriate the $29,983 cash payment-in-lieu-of-park-
reservation payment from the Eagle Cove subdivision to Capital Improvement Program Project
4-023, "Neighborhood Park Acquisition and Development - Phase II"
. Attachments: Ordinance, City Council Policy and description/map of the Eagle Cove
subdivision.
Recommended Action: Approval
Submitting DepartmentJAge~cy:
City Manag : I lL
Department of Parks and Recreation ~
,~~
1 AN ORDINANCE TO ACCEPT AND APPROPRIATE
2 $29,983 FROM THE EAGLE COVE SUBDIVISION
3 DEVELOPMENT TO CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
4 PROGRAM PROJECT 4-023, "NEIGHBORHOOD PARK
5 ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT - PHASE II"
6
7 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH,
8 VIRGINIA:
9
10 That a $~~9,983 cash-in-lieu-of-park-reservation payment is hereby accepted from
11 the Eagle COVEl Subdivision Development and appropriated to Capital Improvement
12 Program Project 4-023, "Neighborhood Park Acquisition and Development - Phase II" for
13 the purposes of improving neighborhood parks in the Indian River Road/Elbow Road
14 corridor, with revenue from the local sources increased accordingly in the FY 2006-07
15 Capital Improvement Budget.
16 Requires an affirmative vote by a majority of the members of the City Council.
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:
~- ~;4
anagem~t ~rvices -
;:e' ~~~ *=
City Attorney's Office
CA 10440
R-2
June 14, 2007
I l
"
City
Council
Policy
TItle Cash Payment In Lieu of Park Reservation Index Number 301
Date of Adoption I Date of RevIsion Page 1 of 2
, 0 Purpose end Need for Policies and Procedures
Section 4 5 of the SubdivIsion Ordinance. Public Sites and Open Spaces. has been used as the tool to acquire
neighborhood parks and open space In developing areas Section 4 5 IS also 8 1001 for acqUl1Ing sensitIVe
environmental land It requires the developer to reserve a parcel of land for open sp3ce and recreational
purposes according to a formula based on lot Slle T"e City has the option of purchasing this reserved land
Within five years at current market value The following alternatIVeS to reservation are currently available In the
SubdiVIsion Ordinance
DedIcatIon. DedIcation of land at no cest to the City Dedication IS one-half of reservation requlTement
specifIed In the SubdiVIsion Ordinance
Other Arrangements. Other mutually agreeable arrangements approved by CItY Council which could mclude
a cash payment
Homeowners' ASSOCIatIOn Establtsh a homeowners' aSSOCiation which would own the property and would
constitute an equivalent recreational amenity
As noted. SectIon 4 5 of the SubdIVISion Ordinance allows for cash payments as an alternatIve to reservations
Cash payments In llelJ of a reservation or dedIcation 15 deslTable when the dedication requirement IS small (less
than one acrel or due to an analYSIS of eXIsting open space/recreation amenities 10 relation to standards based
on population. It IS determined that additional/and IS not needed ThIS policy IS needed to clarify the process
and value for determining cash payments to ensure a conSistent and equitable approach for cash payments.
This polley 1$ Intended 11$ 1I guide fOf determmlng cash In lieu of IflSfIIfVlIrlOns or dflldlClIr/ons. The cu"enr
subdivisIOn ordmancfII cannot IfllqU"fI cash pllyment In lieu of IflSfJfVlItlons Of d"du;.rion... Once receIVed. the
cash paymenTS are to be deSignated for Improvements within the plannIng area of the developing 5ubdMSlon
2.0 f.2!!g
Cash payments are recommended as an acceptable alternative to dedication of open space area when the
dedicatiOn requirement IS such that the resultmg park space would not be a useful amentty based on statlstlcal
cTlterra and standards used for acqUisItion of parle space (generally less than one acrel All cash In lieu of
payments are to be deTermined by the CIty Real Estate Assessor and based on the dedication reqUIrement
muftlphed by the assessed land value In the case where a property has a current land value and market value
due to land use taxatIon for Quallfy.ng farm anO reforested property. the market value w.1I be used to determine
the cash payment Cash payments Will be cue upon approval by City Council unless other arrangements are
approved by CItY Councd
3 0 Procedure to Accomplish Policy
SubdiVISion plans are currently reviewed for comphance WIth the SubdIVISion Ordinance as coordinated by the
Planning Depanment Parks and Recreation reviews all subdIVISion plans reqUIred to meet Section 4 5 of the
Subd,vls.on Ordtnance The procedures and pohcles are 10 place to determme the reservatIon or dedication
reqUIrement ihe assessed value 01 properties IS dete,mlned by the City Assessor's OffIce
I .
4 0 ResponsIbility and Au1hontv
The Duector of Parks and Recreation shall be responSIble for coordInating the revIew process for cash payments.
RepresentatIVes from the Depanment of Parks and RecreatIon. Public Works/Real Estate. City Assessor's Office,
Department olf Planning, and the City Anorney's Office will review cash In heu of payments. The City
Assessor's 01'flce Will determine the assessed land value The Director of Parks and RecreatIOn WIll review the
proposal for cash .n lieu dediCatiOn/reservatIon against the City's Outdoors Plan and attach a signed finding of
contormlty/cc1mpbance with the Plan.
5 0 DefinItions
DedicatIon Requllement: Dehned In Section 4 5 of the SubdIVIsIon Ordinance. The dedIcation requIrement IS
one half of the reservatIon requirement
Assessed Vel,Lle: Current monetary value of the propeny as determined by the City Assessor's OffICe.
6 0 SDeclflc ReQUltementa
All cash payments In heu of park dedications are to be approved by CIty Council as IdentIfied In the SubdiVISion
Ordinance. Staff Will prOVIde statIStical analYSIS, appraisal Information, calculatIon of the cash payment, and
agreement from the developer A cash In lieu of form and agreement will be used In thIS process (see anachedl.
These Items are to be Included In the Agenda Request for approval of the cash payment.
Approved as
to Content:
AtU-d~
~f/95"
Date
Direct or/AdminIStrator
,
Approved as
to legal Suiflclency:
c~ ~1.~ J/ ;1!U(j
~ k-..~~
ihwr,r:O~~
Mayor
J - :t-9J-
D'te
fee:,'QM~Q,o 'g I ~ 4 ~
Date J
Rev'ewed by
APPROVED BY
CITY COUNCIL
J2! ,;2 J / 7~
Date
:b:'''-3~
I 1:_~
~~ ~ <;J Cl
I. I\) '"'
...",~ Cl~
~,~'-C t < ~J
Cl <..., :"i
~ ~~S" S:1l"
<)
0::;: ~6'
. . 6
~~~
.....UlN
~(/)UI
o.
~/. :'1
.......
/
--
"
~~
~::.;:
;::!<
:boll)
~:tJ
.....
"'C:i
~f)
~~~
~""'.,.,
r-
\:>-
a~
:!l~
lI)
"'~
~~
~.-.
~~-O
0:;:0
-0
1""10-0
~:;:oO
1""1>(/)
Z-1""1
-1Z 0
~
1""1
I
I
C) ~
~~ ~
.. ~ ~~
:O:<...,r-I\));:<
~.<o S;':- ~ ~
I.... "lJ....
~~-<;J:t
1
;;:;l:: ~
~~ ~
/
/
/
........
........
"
/
/
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: An Ordinance to Accept and Appropriate a Grant from the Virginia Tobacco Settlement
Foundation in the Amount of $16,802 to the Department of Parks and Recreation's FY
2007 -08 Operating Budget
MEETING DATE: June 26,2007
. Background: The Department of Parks and Recreation has received notification of a
one-year grant in the amount of $16,802 from the Virginia Tobacco Settlement Foundation to
implement "Too Good for Drugs" (TGFD). TGFD is an evidence-based program designed to
reduce risk factors and enhance protective factors relating to alcohol, tobacco, and other drug
use among 350 Virginia Beach middle school youth, grades 6-8. The program will be community
based and will be implemented during out-of-school-time in existing middle school before-and
after-school programs serving approximately 150 youth in seven schools. In addition, summer
camps will serve approximately 200 youth in four middle schools during July and August, 2007.
The grant period is July 1,2007 - June 30,2008.
. Considerations: TGFD is based on many assumptions consistent with the
Developmental Assets Framework, including a proactive, positive focus and a commitment to
long-term building of internal and external assets for all students, regardless of their level of risk.
This is particularly significant for the Department and the Virginia Beach community, as we have
adopted the Developmental Assets Framework as a tool for mobilizing the community to playa
positive role in the development of our young people. Thus, the goal of TGFD is not only to
prevent problem behaviors, but also to promote positive, healthy youth development. TGFD
aligns with the goals of Safe Community and Family and Youth Opportunities and supports our
vision for youth: "All Our Children Are Well."
This grant will support the hiring of a .5 FTE Prevention SpecialisUEducator and a .1 FTE
clerical support person for the length of the grant. The Youth Opportunities Office will seek
continuation funding through the Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities grant program.
If continuation funding from outside sources is not secured, the additional staff hired for this
project will be terminated at the end of the grant period. There is no match required for this
grant. Staff involved in existing programs will devote a portion of their efforts to this grant.
Contributed staff time is included as a voluntary local in-kind contribution.
. Public Information: Public information will be handled through the normal Council
agenda process.
. Attachments: Ordinance and Virginia Tobacco Settlement Foundation Funding
Notification Letter
Recommended Action: Adopt Ordinance
Submitting Department/Agency: Department of Parks and Recreatio
City Manage' l ,~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
AN ORDINANCE TO ACCEPT AND APPROPRIATE A
GRANT FROM THE VIRGINIA TOBACCO SETTLEMENT
FOUNDATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $16,802 TO THE
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION'S FY 2007-08
OPERATING BUDGET
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA
BEACH, VIRGINIA:
(1) That a $16,802 grant is accepted from the Virginia Tobacco Settlement Fund
and appropriatE~d to the Department of Parks and Recreation's FY 2007-08 Operating
Budget, with estimated State revenue increased accordingly.
(2) That a 0.5 FTE Prevention Specialist/Educator and a 0.1 FTE clerical support
position are authorized for the period of the grant, July 1, 2007 - June 30, 2008 and, that
these positions will be terminated at the end of the grant period.
Requires an affirmative vote by a majority of the members of the City Council.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the
,2007.
day of
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY:
~~
nt S ~rvices ""'-
-;:e ~ ~
City Attorney's Office
CA 10443
R-2
June 14, 2007
VIRGINIA TOBACCO
SETTLEMENT FOUNDATION
May 23,2007
Charles W. Meyer
Chief Operating Officer
City of Virginia Beach Youth Opportunities Office
2289 Lynnhaven Parkway
Virginia Beach, V A 23456
Dear Mr. Meyer:
Congratulations! Your application for VTSF program RFP #852P008 has been approved
for funding for the grant term of July 1, 2007-June 30, 2008. Funding is being awarded
in the amount of $16,802.
Please mail two signed copies of the contract to my attention at the VTSF Richmond
office (701 E. Franklin Street, Suite 501, Richmond, V A 23219). As soon as the
contract copies are received, they will be reviewed for completeness. VTSF will then
sign the contracts and return one original to you.
Thank you for your interest in providing quality tobacco use prevention programs to the
youth of the Commonwealth of Virginia. We look forward to working with you.
Sincerely,
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: An Ordinance to Appropriate $2,426 from the American Cancer Society to the
Department of Planning and Community Development's FY 2006-07 Operating
Budget to Compensate the Hampton Roads Transit (HRT) for Providing Shuttle
Service to the American Cancer Society Annual Relay for Life Fundraiser
MEETING DATE: June 26, 2007
. Background: On June 2 & 3, 2007 the American Cancer Society hosted their
annual Relay for Life fundraiser at Redwing Park. The American Cancer Society
entered into agreements with GEICO and Lockheed Martin to use their parking
facilities in Corporate Landing for satellite parking for the event. The American
Cancer Society asked HRT to provide shuttle service to transport participants
from these off-site parking areas to Redwing Park. The cost for this service was
$2,426. Due to charter restrictions, HRT is not permitted to bill the American
Cancer Society directly. HRT r:nust bill the City for this service, but the American
Cancer Society has agreed to reimburse the City for this cost.
. Considerations: The American Cancer Society is the largest source of private,
not-for-profit cancer research funds in the United States. Relay for Life is the
signature event of this organization and is a team event that promotes
survivorship and increases cancer awareness in our community and is
considered the nation's largest non-profit fundraising event.
. Public Information: Public Information will be handled through the normal City
Council agenda process.
. Recommendation: It is recommended that Council approve the appropriation of
$2,426 from the American Cancer Society to the Department of Planning and
Community Development's FY 2006-07 Operating Budget to compensate HRT
for providing shuttle service to the American Cancer Society Annual Relay for
Life fund raiser.
. Attachment: Ordinance and Agreement Letter
Recommended Action: Approve \
Submitting Department/Agency: Department of Planning and Community Development I\~
City Manage~ IL .~~ ' ,
1 AN ORDINANCE TO APPROPRIATE $2,426 FROM THE
2 AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF
3 PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FY 2006-07
4 OPERATING BUDGET TO COMPENSATE THE HAMPTON
5 ROADS TRANSIT (HRT) FOR PROVIDING SHUTILE
6 SERVICE TO THE AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY ANNUAL
7 RELAY FOR LIFE FUNDRAISER
8
9 WHEREAS, the American Cancer Society held their annual Relay for Life fundraiser
10 on June 2nd and 3rd at Redwing Park; and
11
12 WHEREAS, Hampton Roads Transit (HRT) provided shuttle service for the event, at
13 a cost of $2,426; and
14
15 WHEREP\S, HRT has billed the City for this expense, and the American Cancer
16 Society has agre~ed to reimburse the City for this cost.
17
18 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
19 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:
20
21 That $2,426 is hereby accepted and appropriated to the Department of Planning
22 and Community Development's FY 2006-07 Operating Budget to compensate the Hampton
23 Roads Transit for providing shuttle service to the American Cancer Society for their annual
24 Relay for Life fundraiser and that estimated revenue be adjusted accordingly.
25
26 Adopted the by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, _ day of
27 ,2007.
28
29 Requires an affirmative vote by a majority of the members of the City Council.
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL
SUFFICIENCY:
~~
Manage ent Services
:e~
City Attorney's oC
CA 10439
R-2
June 14, 2007
May 23,2007
Travis Campbell
Planner III
Va. Beach Department of Planning
Municipal Center, Building 2, Room 115
2405 Courthouse Drive
Virginia Beach, V A 23456
Mr. Campbell,
The American Cancer Society is committed to pay the sum of $2,425.92 to 'cover
the cost of the HRT shuttle service for the Relay For Life on June 2 & 3.
The schedule is as follows:
Relay For Life of Virginia Beach
Red Wing Park
June 2 & 3 (Saturday & Sunday)
Transportation is needed between Red Wing and the overflow parking lots of Geico &
Lockheed Martin, off of Corporate Landing.
Hours of transportation on Saturday are 11 :OOam to 11 :OOpm and Sunday from 7:00am to
12:00pm.
Two buses would run on Saturday from 11 :OOam to 8:00pm.
We appreciate the use ofthis service and we look forward to working with the HRT in
the future. For any further questions or concerns please call Emily Simmons at
757.493.7954.
Sincerely,
Emily Simmons
Emily Simmons
Income Manager
American Cancer Society
4416 Expressway Drive
Virginia Beach, V A 23452
757-493-7954 (Phone)
757-493-9450 (Fax)
K. PLANNING
1. Applications at 1763 Princess Anne Road DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE
a. HAC PROPERTIES, LLC, re Modification of Proffer No 3 to allow low speed motor
vehicle sales, and future retail establishments, laboratories for the production and repair of
eye glasses, hearing aids and prosthetic devices (approved on June 22, 2004)
RECOMMENDATION
APPROVAL
b. NORMA DIANE PAYNE HEWIT tla ARGO OF TIDEWATER for a Conditional
Use Permit re sale of low speed vehicles at 1763 Princess Anne Road
RECOMMENDATION
APPROVAL
2. Application of CAVALIER GOLF & YACHT CLUB for a Conditional Use Permit re a
golf club Agronomy facility at Kamichi Court. DISTRICT 5 - L YNNHA VEN
RECOMMENDATION
APPLICANT REQUESTS DEFERRAL TO JUL Y 10, 2007
APPROVAL
3. 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 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 ("Renaissance Park") DISTRICT 1 - CENTERVILLE
and DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE
DEFERRED MAY 22, & JUNE 26, 2007
RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL WITH CONDITION
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Virginia Beach City Council will meet in the Chamber at City Hall, Municipal
Center, 2401 Courthouse Drive, Tuesday, June 26, 2007, at 6:00
p.m. The following applications will be heard:
DISTRICT 5 - L YNNHA VEN
Cavali.er Golf & Yacht Club Application: Conditional Use Permit for a golf
club (maintenance facility) at Kamichi Court (Gp'IN 24184145480000). AICUZ
is Greater than 75 dB Ldn and partially within Accident Potential Zone 2.
DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE
HAC Properties, L.L.C. Application: Modification of Proffers for a request'
approved by City Council on June 22, 2004 at 1763 Princess Anne Road (GPIN
2403916498). AICUZ is 65 to 70 dB Ldn.
Norma Diane Payne Hewett Va Argo of Tidewater Application: Conditional
Use Permit for motor vehicle sales (low speed vehicles) at 1763 Princess
Anne Road, Suites 101 and 102 (GPIN 2403916498). AICUZ is 65 to 70 dB.
Ldn.
All interested citizens are invited to attend.
Cf:~~
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 http://www.vbgov.com/pc For information call 385-4621.
If you are physically disabled or visually Impaired and need
assistance at this meeting, please call the CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
at 385-4303.
Beacon June 10 & 17, 2007
17032490
Mat> K-14
Mo ~t to Scole
D
.'"'
00'
r
""'"
,,~~
,rft:"l~~~~~
f"Pl: -.....'f'''...'O)
p::' ~,7.>
~t- 'J....W
l\.:'l-1.:1.... .....,.~
...~~-.:::.:;..t
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
~
""-
ITEM: Application of HAC Properties, L.L.C. for a Modification of Proffers for a
request approved by City Council on June 22, 2004. Property is located at 1763
Princess Anne Road (GPIN 2403916498). DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE
MEETING DATE: June 26, 2007
. Background:
A Conditional Change of Zoning for this site from AG-2 Agricultural District to
Conditional B-2 Business District was approved by the City Council on June 22,
2004. Proffer 3 of that Change of Zoning restricts the allowable uses of the site.
The applicant now desires to modify that proffer to allow motor vehicle sales;
retail establishments; and laboratories and establishments for the production and
repair of eye glasses, hearing aids and prosthetic devices.
The property owner currently has an existing tenant that proposes to expand its
product line from golf carts to include electric-powered low speed vehicles (LSV).
T.he LSV is a four-wheeled, electrically~powered vehicle whose maximum speed
is greater than 20 mph but less than 25 mph. The additional uses proposed for
addition to Proffer 3 will permit future tenants to use the property.
. Considerations:
The site plan approved in 2004 is unchanged. Access to the site is from Princess
Anne Road along a drive aisle that runs back to the main portion of the site. The
site has seven (7) single-story brick office-warehouse units and approximately
15,500 square feet of single-story predominately brick mini-warehouse storage
units.
The Planning Commission placed this item on the consent agenda because they
concluded the modification to the list or permitted uses is reasonable, staff
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, as proffered.
. Attachments:
Staff Review
Disclosure Statement
Planning Commission Minutes
Location Map
HAV Properties, L.L.C.
Page 2 of 2
Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends
approval.
Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department~
City Manage~)( .~~
..,
REQUEST:
Modification of Proffers from the Conditional
Change of Zoning from granted by the City
Council on April 11 , 2000.
MTfjM~t {<;,-{t~18
HAC PROPERTIES,
LLC
Agenda Item 6
May 9, 2007 Public Hearing
Staff Planner: Karen Prochilo
ADDRESS I DESCRIPTION: Property located at 1763 Princess Anne Road.
GPIN:
24039164980000
COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT:
7 - PRINCESS ANNE
SITE SIZE:
3.34 acre lot
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
A Conditional Rezoning from AG-2 Agricultural District to
Conditional B-2 Business District was approved by the City Council on June 22, 2004. The Conditional
Rezoning has five (5) proffers (listed below). Proffer 3 restricts allowable use of the site. The applicant
desires to modify that proffer to allow use of one of the units in the complex for a use that is not currently
listed:
PROFFER 1 When the Property is developed, it shall be developed substantially as shown on
the exhibit entitled "PRELIMINARY LAYOUT PUNGO COMMERCE CENTER",
prepared by Mel Smith & Associates, dated 4-11-2004, which has been exhibited
to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach
Department of Planning (hereinafter "Site Plan").
PROFFER 2 When the property is developed, the buildings depicted on the Site Plan will have
the architectural design and will utilize the building materials substantially as
depicted and designated on the exhibit entitled "PROPOSED ELEVATIONS
FOR PUNGO COMMERCE CENTER" prepared by Mel Smith & Associates,
dated 4-11-2004, which have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council
and are on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning (hereinafter
referred to as the "Elevation Plans")
PROFFER 3 When the Property is developed, only the following uses will be permitted:
HAC PROPERTIES, LLC
Agenda Item 6
Page 1
a) Business Studios, offices and clinics;
b) Mini-warehouses;
c) Repair and sales for radio and television and other household
appliances and small business machines.
PROFFER: 4 All outdoor lighting shall be shielded, deflected, shaded and focused to direct
light down onto premises and away from adjoining property.
PROFFER 5 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.
Proffer 3 indicates permitted uses and is requested for modification to allow motor vehicle sales; retail
establishments; and laboratories & establishments for the production and repair of eye glasses, hearing
aids and prosthetic devices.
Currently, the property owner has an existing tenant proposing to expand its product line from golf carts to
include electric-powered low speed vehicles (LSV). The LSV is a four-wheeled, electrically-powered
vehicle whose maximum speed is greater than 20 mph but less than 25 mph.
The additional uses proposed for addition to Proffer 3 will permit future tenants to use the property.
The approved site plan remains unchanged. Access to the site is from Princess Anne Road along a drive
aisle that runs back to the main portion of the site. The site has seven (7) single-story brick office-
warehouse units and approximately 15,500 square feet of single-story predominately brick mini-
warehouse storage.
LAND USE AND ZONING INFORMATION
EXISTING LAND USE: office-warehouse facility and mini-warehouse storage
SURROUNDING LAND
USE AND ZONING:
North:
· Farm field and single-family residentiaL gas station / AG-2
Agricultural District
· Farm field and single-family residential! AG-2 Agricultural
District
· Across Princess Anne Road, offices and retail / B-2 Community
Business District
· Property owned by the City of Virginia Beach (Mounted Police
Facility)! AG-1 & AG-2 Agricultural Districts
South:
East:
West:
NATURAL RESOURCE AND
CULTURAL FI:ATURES:
Portions of the property are situated in the Southern Watershed
Management Area.
AICUZ:
The site is in an AICUZ of 65 dB Ldn to 70 dB Ldn surrounding NAS
Oceana. The amendments to the proffers as requested are compatible
to airfield operations.
HAC PROPERTIES, LLC
Agenda Item 6
Page 2
IMPACT ON CITY SERVICES
MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN CMTP) I CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM CCIP): Princess
Anne Road in the vicinity of this application is a two lane undivided rural Highway. There are currently
no CIP projects scheduled for this section of Princess Anne Road. The Master Transportation Plan Map
indicates an ultimate future right-of-way width of 100 feet for an undivided roadway with bike paths.
TRAFFIC: Street Name Present Present Capacity Generated Traffic
Volume
Princess Anne 9,191 ADT 1 7,400 ADT 1 (Level of Existing Land Use L_
Road Service "C") 130 ADT
12,000 ADT 1 (Level of Proposed Land Use 3 -
Service "D" Capacity) 145 ADT
18,600 ADT 1 (Level of
Service "E")
1
Average Dally Tnps
2 as defined by warehouse I self -storage facility
3 as defined by 3.000 SF replacement of storage with sales
. EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of this request as proffered. The proffers are provided below.
Comprehensive Plan:
The Comprehensive Plan recognizes this site to be within the "Rural Area." Commercial development in
the Rural Area should be locally oriented retail, service, and community uses scaled to be compatible
with the character of the rural landscape. As stated in the Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 6, "Commercial
retail development should be located in existing defined rural commercial centers, such as Creeds and
Blackwater, for supporting the rural community in lieu of strip shopping center development." Due to the
location of the site, the modification of conditions of the existing commercial site to include the sale of
electric powered low speed vehicles is acceptable with the land use policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
Evaluation:
The proposal is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan recommendations for this rural commercial
node, Pungo, which advocates a commercial center. The amended proffers allow for uses that will
provide a service to the surrounding rural area and the Transition Area to the north.
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
HAC PROPERTIES, LLC
Agenda Item 6
Page 3
proffers in al1 attempt to "offset identified problems to the extent that the proposed rezoning is acceptable,"
(9107(h)(1)). Should this application be approved, the proffers will be recorded at the Circuit Court and serve
as conditions restricting the use of the property as proposed with this change of zoning.
PROFFER 1:
Proffer number "3" in the 2004 Proffers is amended to read:
3. Whel1 the Property is developed, only the following uses will be permitted:
a) Business studios, offices and clinics;
b) Mini-warehouses;
c) Repair and sales for radio and television and other household appliances and small business
maGhines;
d) Motor vehicle sales;
e) Retail establishments;
f) Laboratories and establishments for the production and repair of eye glasses, hearing aids and
prosthetic devices.
PROFFER 2:
All of the terms, conditions, covenants, servitudes and agreements set forth in the 2004 Proffers recorded in
the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, as Instrument
#200409020140536, save and except, Proffer 3, as specifically amended and modified herein, shall remain
in force and l~ffect, running with the Property and binding upon the Property and upon all parties and
persons claiming under, by or through the Grantor, its heirs, personal representatives, assigns, tenants, and
other successors in interest or title.
STAFF COMMENTS: The amended proffers listed above are acceptable.
The City Attorney's Office has reviewed the proffer agreement, dated January 30,2007, and found it to be
legally sufficilent and in acceptable legal form.
NOTE: FurthE!r 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 applicani'is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police
Department fl)r crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design
(CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site.
HAC PROPERTIES, LLC
Agenda Item 6
Page 4
AERIAL OF SITE LOCATION
HAC PROPERTIES, LLC
Agenda Item 6
Page 5
~
-
;r
151"
PMC9..8-2
.... ---
~~..
':i
.!
.'~,!~,
;?j;-g,
'If......:........""
Q::;rJ!.~
;H;'~'.
'~'f
""
'Ilt:.~c:zr--
0Ia ~;'I~~ -".
.
I-SlY. Ill.
~-
)....;.:
!~~
'.~~~ I
>>,;
= :.
,-...-,-....-,-...-...-....-... ...-...-,-...-....-.... =.
. ( . ,- ,. _ ol
PRJNCESS~~~OAD (50')
SITE LAYOUT
HAC PROPERTIES,LLC
Agenda Item 6
Page 6
Mab K-14
Mo ~t to Scole
D
075
t:J
JOS
G?
AG-2
00'
Modification of Conditions
1 06/22/04 Granted
Granted
2 10/14/03 Granted
3 07/07/92 Granted
4 08/14/90 Granted
5 12/19/88 Granted
ZONING HISTORY
HAC PROPERTIES, LLC
Agenda Item 6
Page 7
NOIlVJI1ddV SNOIIIUNOJ 10 NOIIVJIlIUOW .
e;
""
J-
Z
Ul
~
Ul
J-
~
(j)
Ul
a::
::>
en
o
~c3
en
o
(;
J-
Z
Ul
:2
Ul
J-
~
en
Ul
a::
::>
en
o
...J
u
en
o
i~
.."
!S_
J::::2 co
~.~.~
(0- "0
..0<:
0..'"
.~ di.
ell" '"
O'.I>~
elle<=
j.::
",e:5g'
w~o=
a:=...C
;:)3i'"
"'0'"'8
...0 ell.!;."
-:0.0- ~
(JCO-.c
~.cg8
~~~.~
c(CDC)ln
~ -;.: ~
-Ol"gc:
t:j;g~_
g ~.-:"" ~
<DOfficn
'-tho co
O",,,ell
.. ,..._ 0
~ ~ <= ell
~ -8.'1 ~
~..~.~:i .
o'"Cc;;~
UC)Q)-<.J
i='ai~
0::1 e$
:c: cr ...
.)C4tCl)IlIO
;ij ;~.~
;;;:5<=<=
...J.- 0 Q) G)
-....
..
.t:l
E
.,
::;;
!
Q.
'"
Q.
'3
U
<C
~
~
.,
:z:
(j
....i
....i
.;
'"
:;:
ell
Q.
e
Cl.
u
<
J:
<..i
c:
~.
",t.)
......J
O/l"";
euf
~~
-'"
c:",
~~
"'z
0",
10",
~~
>o.!2)
000
~
ell__
c:_ 0
00_
cc.2
"'8'"
j.5
!! 8.~
l/)oC:
XlD'4V
"cE
~~.~
- >
~~~
mE-
c Ql!'l
.2co
iii~c;j ....J
"Q;m"
-GJc.
..mtO
'co~ B
c:. c.co
::Ci5
E."
.o.~"l
:E to &
~ig~
~;e~
! g e.~
~:5 8:;'
:o.E:t;4t
]: ~'88
~z icG
~~e-:;
~s~~
a = 0 Cf')
.. Q.-
o ~!
~~B
u>.E
0",
~ii - ni
.S .9-l>>~O >
i Q) ~; ~B 0. tf
:5 ~ i ~.~ "'~ ; 'i: <
ii:.~:a3! i .~.ii -2 g-~
~~:iig-2:!E ='~ii ~
o:~e.!l~.~o:.~ :~c
~ ~g*~ 55i .~~: ~~
,~:~=i ~ :~~'~'~]2
.~ .~ €~,~ .~ ..~ ~.~ .~ g
;;j~O~.E'~~-5~~
~cD'E.b-cn"'Om=41ua;
; a Q) ~ -!~~ ~.~ c; E
(tl _ flcc:::.:= ~,o c: I) E
ewcv.... 1:5,&10 CD..!? 4Ii
ro.~-i~ :~=.'~a!'~
ii~.~.~~~;o,~~
gl!CD=.c;;.oE~~~Q
~..~ ~.s oS g -! E~';.s
"iilDt)~Q1~.oE.2Q)~
;'Cis i:5 ~ i E ~:cv
~~.60~~o8Cbo-!
m.9-~ap! oil) c:: 000,--
(tl ~ 4).5.! 5- 0 .- (/)
; g ~ E ! .~.~ a 5 j :
.5 :::.5 Co ~cQ. E IE '- CI)
~.!! c..o'::~(DE O~..
.Q e'~ ~..c:.~ ~.8 ~ ~.;
i~CDo~Q;0!a~;~
~.~i~2~s::ci~
=!O~i-1Ui=S~~
~ il.~.~ E ~ :5 :5 (; Qj -;; N
f'If ..:. = E& at CD c,;Cll 2 Q) COJ
c:eCDaJ~'g.!!~O.!(V
~g~iC8g~~EtV-g
Q. U 0 E ._ '" _ 0..0 U
a
.,;
..
'"
c
.iii
'"
.0
E
0:
ci:
:;::
m
Iii
c
"
co
Q.
0:
.2
e
o
Q.
(;
"
'"
I~~
..
.....
:'='c
c'"
"''''
~c
~j
<Ill!
':::0
-Q.
~~
QJ .=
.:::c
Ii ~i
o
.;
Iii
.0
Iii ~
.:;;: E
~o vi
~o 8
~qj ::
i~ 0
w c::~ 'iU
~.g.E o~
~ t:E- :~
...J eo: ;;,~..
tJ~ciCC~
~'6'i:~ell;:
o .!2~ g:5 ::
ffi~~.g~~
Zim~i'5
;:0 Q.", 3.!!!
0"'0:-0-
~i~!s~
a: ~ l!! ~ "';:;
~Q.e.~~~
o~ 0 c: C,J:)
g:~~~~~
Q.!e.~ ~ ~
5'"" c: 0 en
~ i ~~ ~
~ o~ &a
.!,:!? ~IV ~ Q,
~ GJ = Q.u:i
~ e ~~ 1!
!:8i2
g.c.s:...J -
f..):;g~
~...ai.~
;.8.5 ..
~. ~ O'-!
(D,J: ! :
19~~
II m.a:B
s~.~a
.!!t&~
-=&'0:;
;~:ei
~~;~~
~ ~'i'.!
~~~~
O.ct) -....... (
"8..2.2
a - J! Q. ".\
....;.~~ !e....g
e-c:"
.2.g8.~ ~
.s:.g ;~'~
~:: E :g.!!('
=O'CD~=)
CIS'Q.--C
=8 ~~.~
~!!'~ ...2
i c CD 0..(:5 1(-\
uo..c:.~2(,)~
:: g. g ~~ ..J
Z ni...g 0; _
~ = ~:g:5~
~~; :s' 0. .
- - ~= ~ 0,:
~~-5g~d: :i
ffi'g~ c: 8~ ..~
0-= ~~~::z:~.t
'>.
;;
c:
<Il
..
..
ell
c:
...
::>
.t:l
-g
E
~~
5~
- ~
.~~
~~
~.~
'E~
eo::
&~
CG';":
~B
CD ;.::
.r:Q.
- Q.
"CD
:5..
:~
~j
J::.Q.
~:E
.t:l:!!
1i.~
_CD
~~
N
E
.;
<i
:;::
f!
'"
<:
~
to
Q.
e:
.2
1ii
o
E!-c:
00
u;:
~.~
0;
:l;e>
mO
.~'~
c:'"
-~o
~~
8..~
oc
ss.;:
..'"
.r:.r:
;-0
IDO
i:
tl~
~.0
uE
o
~
~
~
0;
0.
Q.
8-
:;
u
~~
"'z
.e-
:!~
~
"
g
~
.2
[
g
"
~
..
I
I'"
!~
Ii
I
II
Q.
Co
..
<:
~
~
~
15
:=.
'"
~
<:
..
(i;
.~
!
~
~
~
.
.~
/l i}
~i~
~=j
xh
"..0:
Ii
'"
.0
E
'"
E
Iii
.r:
o ~
o ..
"
~ ~~
~.~ ,~~
iilE Ole l'l
gE.~:l:g
oc;gi:::
~ .e:-;; ~
~~=:5"5
~~S~~
~i~~~
~C:gg~
~.~~=S~
~~;~
e-~~ai
S'i -= ~&
:: ~;t~
~i~~
g!::
8: &.; s
: 8.i2
~ .:: -J _
- c: .
"'~
~
C
<Il
'"
..
III
c:
.~
.Q
i
.i
iE-,.,
..c
~1!l
0.,
- e
j~
"....
~i
:I~
.!'5
i.!
[~
co"":
~5
"'=
":;;:0.
- Q.
....
='"
m:5
==
~'3:
.5. Q.
~:E
.0"
c:
~.g
-to
.!!Qi
...J_
N
~
<:
8-
o
Ii:
F~
~~s
~ii
...z....
:s ~
~
"
o
g
j
~
. NOl!VJI1ddV SNOI1IUNOJ dO NOI1VJIlIUOW
HAC PROPERTIES, LLC
Agenda Item 6
Page 8
Item #6
HAC Properties, L.L.C.
Modification of Proffers
1763 Princess Anne Road
District 7
Princess Anne
May 9, 2007
CONSENT
Janice Anderson: The next matter is agenda item 6. That is the application of HAC
Properties, L.L.c. This is for Modification of Proffers that were approved by City
Council back on June 22, 2004. It is on property located at 1763 Princess Anne Road in
the Princess Anne District. Welcome Mr. Bourdon.
Eddie Bourdon: Thank you Ms. Anderson. Again, for the record, Eddie Bourdon, a
Virginia Beach attorney representing the applicant and the applicant is here this
afternoon. We appreciate your placing this matter on the consent agenda.
Janice Anderson: Thank you. Is there any opposition to this matter being placed on the
consent agenda? Seeing none, the Chairman has asked Don Horsley to review this for us.
Donald Horsley: Thank you very much. The Conditional Rezoning took place in 2004.
It listed five proffers. The applicant has indicated that he would like to change Proffer 3,
which is the proffer that indicates the uses allowed on the property. The request will be
modified to allow motor vehicle sales, retail establishments, laboratories and
establishments for the production and repair of eyeglasses, hearing aids and prosthetics
devices. Cu~ently, the property owner has an existing tenant who wishes to expand his
product line from golf carts to include electric powered low speed vehicles, which is a
four-wheel vehicle that travels between 20 to 25 mph, maximum speed. There are no
objections to this. It has been made very clear that the motor vehicle sales will not allow
any other types of motor vehicles sales, such as used car lots and whatever to be
accomplished. So, the Commission thought it deserved to be on the consent agenda.
Thank you.
Janice Anderson: Thank you Don. Mr. Chairman, I make a motion for the consent of
agenda item 6.
Barry Knight: There is a motion on the table to approve the consent agenda item. The
motion made by Jan Anderson and seconded by Dot Wood. Is there any discussion? I'll
call for the question.
AYE 10
NAY 0
ABSO
ABSENT 1
~,"'~~~
ANDERSON AYE
Item #6
HAC Properties, L.L.c.
Page 2
BERNAS
CRABTREE:
HENLEY
HORSLEY
KA TSIAS
KNIGHT
LIVAS
REDMOND
STRANGE
WOOD
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
ABSENT
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
Ed Weeden: By a vote by 10-0, the Board has approved item 6 for consent.
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE
In Reply Refer To Our File No. DF-6713
DATE: June 12, 2007
FROM:
Leslie L. Lilley _ t/\ I \\
B. Kay WiIS~
DEPT: City Attorney
DEPT: City Attorney
TO:
RE: Conditional Zoning Application: HAC Properties, LLC
The above-referenced conditional zoning application is scheduled to be heard by the
City Council on June 26, 2007. I have reviewed the subject proffer agreement, dated
January 30, 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 BY:
lIB sYns. ROURDON.
m AYtRN & lIVY. P.c.
FIRST AMENDMENT TO PROFFERED COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS AND
CONDITIONS
HAC PROPERTIES, L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company
TO (PROFFERED COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS AND CONDITIONS)
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
THIS AGREEMENT, made this 30th day of January, 2007, by and between HAC
PROPERTIES, L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company, Grantor; and THE CITY OF
VIRGINIA BEACH, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia, Grantee.
WITNESSETH:
'I\THEREAS, the Grantor is the owner of that certain parcel of property located in
the Princess Anne District of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, designated as Parcel "B-
2" containing approximately 3.34 acres and described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference said property hereinafter referred to as the
"Property"; and
'I\THEREAS, the Grantor has initiated a modification to a conditional amendment to
the Zoning Map of the City of Virginia Beach, by petition addressed to the Grantee so as to
modify lconditions to the Zoning Classification of the Property; and
WHEREAS, the Grantor has requested Grantee to permit this modification of the
previously proffered Covenants, Restrictions and Conditions dated August 26, 2004
(hereinafter "2004 Proffers"), to reflect amendments applicable to the land use plan on the
Property; and
'I\THEREAS, the Grantee's policy is to provide only for the orderly development of
land for various purposes through zoning and other land development legislation; and
GPIN: ~~403-91-6498t
1
PREPARED BY:
~ SYKIS. I}OURDON.
mil AHIRN & LM. P.c.
WHEREAS, the Grantor acknowledges that the competing and sometimes
incompatible development of various types of uses conflict and that in order to permit
differing types of uses on and in the area of the Property and at the same time to recognize
the effects of change that will be created by the proposed modification of conditions to the
zoning, certain reasonable conditions governing the use of the Property for the protection
of the community that are not generally applicable to land similarly zoned are needed to
resolve the situation to which the application gives rise; and
WHEREAS, the Grantor has voluntarily proffered, in writing, in advance of and
prior to the public hearing before the Grantee, as a part of the proposed modification to
the existing zoning conditions with respect to the Property, the following reasonable
conditions related to the physical development, operation, and use of the Property to be
adopted, which conditions have a reasonable relation to the proposed modification and the
need for which is generated by the proposed modification.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Grantor, its successors, personal representatives, assigns,
grantees, and other successors in title or interest, voluntarily and without any requirement
by or exaction from the Grantee or its governing body and without any element of
compulsion or quid pro quo for zoning, rezoning, site plan, building permit, or subdivision
approval, hereby makes the following declaration of conditions and restrictions which
shall restrict and govern the physical development, operation, and use of the Property and
hereby covenants and agrees that this declaration shall constitute covenants running with .
the Property, which shall be binding upon the Property and upon all parties and persons
claiming under or through the Grantor, its successors, personal representatives, assigns,
grantees, and other successors in interest or title:
1. Proffer number "3" in the 2004 Proffers is amended to read:
3. When the Property is developed, only the following uses will be
permitted:
a)
b)
c)
Business studios, offices and clinics;
Mini-warehouses;
Repair and sales for radio and television and other household
appliances and small business machines;
Motor vehicle sales;
Retail establishments;
Laboratories and establishments for the production and repair
of eye glasses, hearing aids and prosthetic devices.
d)
e)
f)
2
:~. All of the terms, conditions, covenants, servitudes and agreements set forth
in the :2004 Proffers recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of
Virginia Beach, Virginia, as Instrument #200409020140536, save and except, Proffer 3, as
specifically amended and modified herein, shall remain in force and effect, running with
the Property and binding upon the Property and upon all parties and persons claiming
under, by or through the Grantor, its heirs, personal representatives, assigns, tenants, and
other SUlccessors in interest or title.
The Grantor further covenants and agrees that:
.All references hereinabove to the B-2 Business District and to the requirements and
regulations applicable thereto refer to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and
Subdivision Ordinance of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in force as of the date of
approval of this Agreement by City Council, which are by this reference incorporated
herein.
PREPARED BY,
The above conditions, having been proffered by the Grantor and allowed and
accepted by the Grantee as part of the amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, shall continue
in full force and effect until a subsequent amendment changes the zoning of the Property
and specifically repeals such conditions. Such conditions shan continue despite a
subsequent amendment to the Zoning Ordinance even if the subsequent amendment is
part of a comprehensive implementation of a new or substantially revised Zoning
Ordinance until specifically repealed. The conditions, however, may be repealed,
amended, or varied by written instrument recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit
Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and executed by the record owner of the
Property at the time of recordation of such instrument, provided that said instrument is
consented to by the Grantee in writing as evidenced by a certified copy of an ordinance or a
resolution adopted by the governing body of the Grantee, after a public hearing before the
Grantee which was advertised pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.2-2204 of the Code
of Virginia, 1950, as amended. Said ordinance or resolution shall be recorded along with
said instrument as conclusive evidence of such consent, and if not so recorded, said
instrument shall be void.
(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
!;JIB SYns. IlOURDON.
M AHrRN & LfVY. P.C
3
PREPARED BY:
(;JIB SYk'IS. ROURDON.
m AHERN & LEVY. P.c.
conditions be remedied; and (b) to bring legal action or suit to insure compliance with
such conditions, including mandatory or prohibitory injunction, abatement, damages, or
other appropriate action, suit, or proceeding;
(2) The failure to meet all conditions and restrictions shall constitute cause to
deny the issuance of any of the required building or occupancy permits as may be
appropriate;
(3) If aggrieved by any decision of the Zoning Administrator, made pursuant to
these provisions, the Grantor shall petition the governing body for the review thereof prior
to instituting proceedings in court; and
(4) The Zoning Map may show by an appropriate symbol on the map the
existence of conditions attaching to the zoning of the Property, and the ordinances and the
conditions may be made readily available and accessible for public inspection in the office
of the Zoning Administrator and in the Planning Department, and they shall be recorded
in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and indexed
in the names of the Grantor and the Grantee.
4
PREPARED BY:
~ SYHS. IWURDON.
mil AHfRN & LM. P.c.
'WITNESS the following signature and seal:
Grantor:
HAC Properties, L.L.C., a Virginia limited
liability company
STATE OF VIRGINIA
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 31st day of January,
2007, by Herbert A. Culpepper, Member of HAC Properties, L.L.C., a Virginia limited
liability company, Grantor.
-~~1fIJ ]11e(!01K&
otary'Public
My Commission Expires: August 31, 2010
5
PREPARED BY:
53JB sYns. 110URDON.
.. AHERN & lEVY. P.C
EXHIBIT "A!'
ALL THAT certain lot, piece' or pareel of land, with the buildings and improvements
. thereon situate, lyiRg.:imd-being in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and being known,
numbered' and .designated.'. as .Par-cel B-2, as shown on that certain plat . entitled,
"RESUBDlVISION::' OF PARCEL B, SUBDIVISION OF PROPERTY. OF J. W,
WHITEHURST {NL'B.. 62, p~ 5oA} AND A PORTION OF PARCEL B, SUBDIVISION OF
PROPERTYOEWIELARD'P~WHITEHURST, et ux (M.B. 124, P.55) VIRGINIA BEACH,
VlRGINlA~; dated August 22; 2003, .prepared by Rouse-Sirine Associates, Ltd., which plat
is duly recorded in. the 'Clerk's Office' of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach,
Virginia as Instrument #200312080203441.
LESS AND EXCEPT the property conveyed to Charlie E. Gray, Jr., et ux, by Deed of
William P.: Whitehur.st, et ux, dated November 1, 1978 and recorded in the aforesaid
Clerk's Office in Deed Book 1844, at Page 342.
GPIN: 2403-91-6498 (formerly 2403-91-7652)
GPIN: 1494-63-2595 (Part of)
ModificationofProffers/HACProperties/Proffer
6
Mal> K-1'4
Mo NOt to Scola
Norma Diane Payne Hewett Va
ARGO of Tidewater
D
015
AG-2
29A
00<
CUP for Motor Vehicle Sales [Low Speed Vehicles]
,,~sE1A:,
~~1:;':."~:'-~'1'
ft5> -," ..~. ;~~)
.'0: ~~~
\\~Z- '~ljl
~~4~~4.t;:Y-4""..'" ItY
"'\.~-::;..ol
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: Application of Norma Diane Payne Hewett tJa Argo of Tidewater for a
Conditional Use Permit for motor vehicle sales (low speed vehicles) on property
located at 1763 Princess Anne Road, Suites 101 and 102 (GPIN 2403916498).
DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE
MEETING DATE: June 26, 2007
. Background:
The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit for the sales of low speed
electric powered vehicles. The applicant currently sells off-road vehicles in their
shop, which is located within Suites 101 and 102 of this office-warehouse
complex. The applicant, however, now proposes to expand the product line to
include Low Speed Vehicles (LSV), which are motorized vehicles operated at
greater than 20 mph but not more than 25 mph. A licensed driver is required to
operate this vehicle on residential neighborhood streets designated by Chapter 7
of the City Code.
. Considerations:
Access to the site is from Princess Anne Road via a drive aisle that runs back to
the main portion of the site. The site has seven (7) single-story brick office-
warehouse units and approximately 15,500 square feet of single-story
predominately brick mini-warehouse storage units.
The business employs one (1) full-time and two (2) part-time employees. The
hours of operation are Monday through Saturday 10 AM until 6 PM. No repair
work will be performed on the site.
The Comprehensive Plan recognizes this site to be within the "Rural Area."
Commercial development in the Rural Area should be locally oriented retail,
service, and community uses scaled to be compatible with the character of the
rural landscape. As stated in the Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 6, "Commercial
retail development should be located in existing defined rural commercial
centers, such as Creeds and Blackwater, for supporting the rural community in
lieu of strip shopping center development."
This is an existing commercial location in a defined rural commercial center. The
request for the sale of electric powered low speed vehicles is in conformance
with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan for this rural commercial node, as
the type of vehicles proposed for sale are suitable for certain roadways in the
surrounding area where the City Code allows such.
Norma Diane Payne Hewett tla Argo of Tidewater
Page 2 of 2
The Planning Commission placed this item on the consent agenda because they
concluded the proposed use is appropriate and compatible to the surrounding
area, staff recommended approval, and there was no objection.
. Recommendations:
The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 10-0 to
approve this request with the following conditions:
1. Sales shall be limited to "low speed vehicles" as defined in 46.2.-100 of the
Code of Virginia.
2. The hours of operation shall be Monday through Saturday 9:00 a.m. until 5:00
p.m.
3. TherE~ shall be no display of vehicles in the public right-of-way. Vehicles shall
also not be displayed on raised platforms anywhere on the site.
4. TherE~ shall be no more than three low speed vehicles displayed for sale
during the hours of operation. The vehicles shall be parked in an area
designated "Vehicle Display Area".
5. TherE~ shall be no outside storage of vehicles, parts or equipment.
6. TherE~ shall be no repair of the vehicles on the premises.
7. No additional freestanding signs shall be permitted.
8. Any modifications to be the building, including awnings or signs, shall be
submitted to the Current Planning Division of the Department of Planning for
approval before installation.
. Attachments:
Staff Review
Disclosun~ Statement
Planning Commission Minutes
Location Map
Recommended ,A.ction: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends
approval.
Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Departmen~
City Manager~ 'Ie.. - 0€e-<'1...
NORMA DIANE
PAYNE HEWETT
TIA ARGO OF
TIDEWATER
Agenda Item 7
May 9,2007 Public Hearing
M!d~.. ~-t~~1
Norma Diane Payne Hewett va
ARGO of Tidewater
Staff Planner: Karen Prochilo
'0
CUP far MotorVehide Sales [Low Speed v...]
REQUEST:
Conditional Use Permit for motor vehicle sales (low speed vehicles).
ADDRESS I DESCRIPTION: Property located at 1763 Princess Anne Road, Suites 101 & 102.
GPIN:
2403916480000
COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT:
7 - PRINCESS ANNE
SITE SIZE:
3,000 square feet of lease space on a
3.34 acre lot
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit for the sales
of low speed electric powered vehicles. The applicant currently sells off-road vehicles in their shop
located within the subject suites, but they propose to expand the product line to include these low-speed
vehicles. A licensed driver is required to operate this vehicle on residential neighborhood streets where
permitted by Chapter 7 of the City Code. The Low Speed Vehicle (LSV) is operated at greater than 20
mph but no more than 25 mph.
The business employs one (1) full-time and two (2) part-time employees. The hours of operation are
Monday through Saturday 10 AM until 6 PM. No repair work will be performed on the site.
Access to the site is from Princes Anne Road via a drive aisle that runs back to the main portion of the
site. The site has seven (7) single-story brick office-warehouse units and approximately 15,500 square
feet of single-story predominately brick mini-warehouse storage. The applicant is located in two of the
office-warehouse units.
HEWETT tla ARGO OF TIDEWATER
Agenda Item 7
Page 1
LAND USE AND ZONING INFORMATION
EXISTING LA.ND USE: office-warehouse facility and mini-warehouse storage
SURROUNDING LAND
USE AND ZONING:
North:
· Farm field and single-family residential, gas station! AG-2
Agricultural District
· Farm field and single-family residential! AG-2 Agricultural
District
· Across Princess Anne Road, offices and retail! B-2 Community
Business District
· Property owned by the City of Virginia Beach (Mounted Police
Facility) ! AG-1 & AG-2 Agricultural Districts
South:
East:
West:
NATURAL RE:SOURCE AND
CULTURAL FEATURES:
The easternmost portion of the site consists of the office warehouse
facility, mini-warehouse storage facility and associated parking. The
portion of the site to the west remains in a natural state.
AICUZ:
The site is in an AICUZ of 65 dB Ldn to 70 dB Ldn surrounding NAS
Oceana. The proposed use is compatible to this AICUZ.
IMPACT ON CITY SERVICES
MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN (MTP) I CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP): Princess
Anne Road in the vicinity of this application is a two-lane undivided rural Highway. There are currently
no CIP projE!cts scheduled for this section of Princess Anne Road. The Master Transportation Plan Map
indicates an ultimate future right-of-way width of 100 feet for an undivided roadway with bike paths.
TRAFFIC: Street Name Present Present Capacity Generated Traffic
Volume
Princess Anne 9,191 ADT' 7,400 ADT 1 (Level of Existing Land Use .<.-
Road Service "C") 130 ADT
12,000 ADT 1 (Level of Proposed Land Use 3 -
Service "0" Capacity) 145 ADT
18,600 ADT 1 (Level of
Service "E")
Average Dally Tnps
2 as defined by warehouse I self-storage facility
3 as defined by 3.000 SF replacement of storage with sales
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of this
EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION
HEWETTtla ARGO OETIDEWATER
Agenda Item 7
Page 2
request with the conditions below.
Comprehensive Plan:
The Comprehensive Plan recognizes this site to be within the "Rural Area." Commercial development in
the Rural Area should be locally oriented retail, service, and community uses scaled to be compatible
with the character of the rural landscape. As stated in the Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 6, "Commercial
retail development should be located in existing defined rural commercial centers, such as Creeds and
Blackwater, for supporting the rural community in lieu of strip shopping center development."
Evaluation:
This is an existing commercial location in a defined rural commercial center. The request for the sale of
electric powered low speed vehicles is in conformance with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan for
this rural commercial node. Any need for renovations to the existing structure or proposed structures
should be designed in a rural architectural style compatible with surrounding development.
CONDITIONS
1. Sales shall be limited to "low speed vehicles" as defined in 46.2.-100 of the Code of Virginia.
2. The hours of operation shall be Monday through Saturday 9:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m.
3. There shall be no display of vehicles in the public right-of-way. Vehicles shall also not be displayed on
raised platforms anywhere on the site.
4. There shall be no more than three low speed vehicles displayed for sale during the hours of operation.
The vehicles shall be parked in an area designated "Vehicle Display Area".
5. There shall be no outside storage of vehicles, parts or equipment.
6. There shall be no repair of the vehicles on the premises.
7. No additional freestanding signs shall be permitted.
8. Any modifications to be the building, including awnings or signs, shall be submitted to the Current
Planning Division of the Department of Planning for approval before installation.
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.
HEWETT Va ARGO OF TIDEWATER
Agenda Item 7
Page 3
AERIAL OF SITE LOCATION
HEWETT Va ARGO OF TIDEWATER
Agenda Item 7
Page 4
NO~
arr ark IJEIDl
A~!!
:2::-
_r~'
tp!:T
9NlCIL 11-2
.....--
~;'"
'"..~
1..';1"::;'''':
,~';;_{S:j
.... ,,,.
l::;I,~'I'TU;:(
EI
g
!(n~ :;;:..
~~~\
1IE~...~
"'1~~~~-M
0Wl.E ;!'!Mr. a.
t l1I!llllllOE CIlEl'
D.&.I425,tc.,m
~~.::. .
'-SlY. III
cm:E,.~REW.
,*:.n~
z
lif
..~
~;li 't::;',
$$
S1
a. .~~~ :&
=
...-...-...-...-...-.....-,-...-...
=.
,-...-...-..-....-,
:l
.(
J
...' ,-4.
PRINCESS(U~tifJOAD (SO')
SITE PLAN SHOWING
LOCATION OF UNITS
HEWETT tla ARGO OF TIDEWATER
Agenda Item 7
Page 5
PHOTO OF UNITS WITHIN BUILDING
HEWETT t/a ARGO OF TIDEWATER
Agenda Item 7
Page 6
HEWETT tla ARGO OF TIDEWATER
Agenda Item 7
Page 7
Mab K-.J4
Mo NOt to Scole
Norma Diane Payne Hewett Va
ARGO of Tidewater
D
015
AG-2
29'
c?
004
CUP for Motor Vehicle Sales [Low Speed Vehicles]
1 06/22/04 Conditional Rezoning from Aa-2 to B-2 Granted
Conditional Use Permit (Self storage Granted
facility)
2 10/14/03 Conditional Use Permit (Museum & Art Granted
Gallery)
3 07/07/92 Conditional Use Permit (Single family & Granted
horse boarding)
4 08/14/90 Conditional Use Permit (Cellular tower) Granted
5 12/19/88 Conditional Rezoning from Ag-2 to B-2 Granted
ZONING HISTORY
HEWETTtla ARGO OF TIDEWATER
Agenda Item 7
Page 8
I-
Z
w
::E
w
t(
I-
(IJ
W
a:
::>
({>
3
o
U>
C
i"e
....a
.....
I!!S
..:'~a;
i..J
..'O~
8!?..
~-8f,
..>~
022:
J ...:.:
(I) l? .t F
w~o=
a::j-C
;h~8
g...s.lil
uiO~.
!!=cl!
~~]~
c '" 0"
~:~:!
- !! ~g
t;i!"u"-
-"iilr"""
.. ::>.-0::'"
c-",.. I
.. o~f ..
5~..~1
1:> &..".
~at~
8jllii
!r;!
.e It .."
""'l!!;"
~.~.~.f
:1..9::
l3
oil"';
II
.'=
~:
-e.
~~
m~
Iii
.....
Ii!
o I!!
~..~ ..
S .Q.~7,0 >
Ii 16 1&; I i co-ri
-= ~ "2.2:&"';'; :>~ <(
_tt:~ E~.. eO ...
~.: go.!:s!~. -iji CIl! .Pi
0":=" - E:': . - !
- .... - .. ..!!.!
.~~. :~ ~~ 0.5 ..I!!.E
-ac'. !"iis!!l~~'5
c : So!-= ... ~.D ft-
.5l....;:.l"lcDii-!:2
'Ii ._- 0.5 o..c: lilac:
...IS e,:. '1S .. l!~. ii ~ ~
;i~~:j8.i-al~
.~! i tjj.' :\ -=! ~
",o..i"".!t"-! E
~~ili~L..:~! l~
. ...5 .- '! 0 c ~
~.e.! li~2_j!C1
~ ~~.V.'6f'ZO'S13
g :;.~ s! ~.5l' l-!! ~
i!:li.!!l.8E.2;~
.:;c_!Iit;;....s:.
f~.E ~i; 0 ~ Ii!!
..s.- B'Clt! e 5 ts ..J!!
....,":=2'_Q .II~
....1!:'28r!."eitl~
!i~i'O c &Ie-eo>.
tIt~ ~.~~-u' .,O.;!!.
~l!~.c:E=ull:>ll
"2.~l!.. 8~:.E ~ !€...:
~.!tI!!li5~II.".;C>
=:2'"1:.10= lDeIl e~;;;
E. '..' --550..
<~...~lli!.!~- .:;<'1
. ..6:5.:.2- ..occ.N
.. .to =.cri -'1... II c.:I: ""
ef.~~2!!I~.!.
&88; 8~i~&.!8
c
oS>
E
III
~
i~~
I-ll'o
.11
!
~
i
NOIlVJl"IcIcIV.mma 9:Sll1VNOWGNOO
~;.
r;
d
a:
Gl
.€-
~'O 2
:C 1:..Sl
"~"E
i-a
.l!l&~
!lOll
~~E
-ii.e
~:S~
!t~
"'1;;-
&~8
fj.- -J
ell!
.:.
~&:I
=20
E~ :
C.M Cf;
:E' ......
&i8~
~~!:;
!~i'"
~_ N
."'0,_
'6.5 . .
-0-51'1
.g ~gc
"l'il. II..
c!'O>
!.'6 Ii 1$
.c~<
~:88. ·
... '!!oCi
Dc'~
il~
ii-z
l!.o-=o i
~j it ~
11 Sf.! II
.~-.!.! i-
I) & 12::0 .,..
~c.i & Co.
.l!l i"lS.'i ~
E Dl!"3 ~I
f!:s,,-g _
!i~l if
Jl~! \
~ 02 Is ~
Sa.'3. . ",i
i!I!&~
~: a~-i '
-o!?_Q.
~~ij~
:S :g.-....!:
>--8i!'~&
~!!i.!l!'tl
86!~2
- g.g~.j:
z ;~ g.;
2="~-= )!
!C:1!~ .. s .
5Uj~ ~ <;
!!:I!:>_'- 1:
~il ~.-e ~io
~~litt~ ~~ml
!
..
Il
R-
:>
o
~!
IDZ
.elf
-..,
:to...
~..-.
I I Ii
'0 .,; ... ."
III il '"
~ 0 c
;;; ~ .,; .,; ~ '0;
0 .s .. .8 :>
e- c .. c D
0 II> C g
.; 'iD E ell
g Cii ., :0 ~ Il II>
';: .. D E II> '=
D II> .&: III
~ E c g 'EO iii c ci
~ Ol 'ij; '" ... iP Iii :c
E ~ "" ,,0 ~ II>
.0 ~0 0 .0 ;;;
"0 ci e
iii S :E ",.. 0 i e
5 a WCl>~ 1::
5 l!1 a:: $:>.- .. .!!! ..
.,; e ~~ ., ~,g~ Q.
W" <: o~ ~~ 1
a:~ 0 <ll~ 1:: <ll~ e
iij o~ III 9<:e ::: ;;; o~ .S!
:J'- 0. !
Cl')tD
0..5 (; - ll> e oe:..E~ .<:l ..
~g tno-=m-u E ~c:-~ ~
... . ~,~ 0; .2 Q~~'~ ;~ .. ~~
010 .- c ii :::;: 0
~.:: 10", 7ii :2:0- 8- O:,fI)f!.2=.~ .- "" 0
co", ~ ., - is
c' co'" .0- U1~OS >'0 .g~ ..
III ~~
Q. ~~ :2 0 z",etll.o"" Co 10-
i~ ~ .:oil 0 ~il;-gE 0. ..- 0
III .J::
<.. >0'" '0 e.. ... Q. -" ~.:
elll
o c:;. ..o.!":.:: l!!:t: ..... o ,.!~~ :; ..- .~.g
:J ~ f~ ~ 0 ~s. I 05 ~~5.!'5:!. u &~ -iii
Q. ...- ~ - E' I ~;:l 0:""-0. c:( tIIN
~ e~- E < 11I- I .!Lg} ~ 7ii EO; .. "'- I "'.-
~~ ~",&.g6~ t" ~3 "" c:
.g:2S~ ~ _e tII o~
::: ca= i "'''' ~"=OC:~Z .c ~.= ~o
~~'~~ ~ .::... co <:0 i;; r::a. ..
_a. 0-
",.0 Q.~ugCio _0. CIl'O I
..'" :I: Q.t11
e-g; ~ 3 III -Ell> ~j o:~~C6 ....
;.. 0-
:I: ...<: (.) ~ co
8'i_.51 t::-:"c:octi ...c: 0.-
Ol ..- IV .~ 0 <
..~ai.8 '" .,r:: :; -0 .g ~ ~~ CD ....i ~~ OlE:- S ~
U) ~ to) , >- GO:::: ""e- g~5t11.e ....i ~.~ :So .v
- 0= 0 '" .~ ~ .; 0 .. I:
'E u8:i) a. ~g C/'),O't:J c.. s.c. .- '" :i'
CIl ...- .~~1I>2a. II> c.- Ol
~::ctJui ".<: 'E :(1)'- _ '" ~.
c CIl._ ~.:: 0" i
=g~i5 co .all> .<:c SlD!~"; III .0" .&:- "II
e :> c: ..
2:~:Sc: i5 ~g ,. ~ e-e.=; a. .><'" 0-
0'" 0 1Q~ I or:: r: S g
IU._ en 1: to -<'0 llllll ~c.o-" Ii: -'" 1 ~o II ",,~
., - .<:.&:
Q) C:._ O'J E ::i! (.)0 ~~ g~g .,- <f) .~;; ;;
.cm....JQ. (.) - '" I 00
-~. 0 ...J-
O-'c < o(! ~..~
:0- Z N )( tJ=j~ J: N 0 2'~s.
.-. - .. - .".
<.>0.0:
HEWETT tla ARGO OF TIDEWATER
Agenda Item 7
Page 9
I-
Z
OJ
::E
OJ
~
I-
(IJ
OJ
0::
::>
en
o
....J
()
(IJ
(5
Item #7
Norma Diane Payne Hewett tJa Argo of Tidewater
Conditional Use Permit
1763 Princess Anne Road, Suites 101 and 102
District 7
Princess Anne
May 9, 2007
CONSENT
Janice Anderson: The next matter is agenda item 7. That is the application of Norma
Diane Payne Hewett tJa Argo of Tidewater. This is for a Conditional Use Permit for
motor vehid~ sales (low speed vehicles) on property located at 1763 Princess Anne Road.
Mr. Bourdon?
Eddie Bourdon: Thank you again, for the record, Eddie Bourdon, a Virginia Beach
attorney representing the applicant. The eight conditions, and there was a condition
added after the informal this morning that this Use Permit is solely for the sale of low
speed vehicles as defined in 46.2-100 of the Code of Virginia, which are the vehicles you
see there (pointing to PowerPoint) which are used throughout Indian River Plantation and
Heron Ridge, and some of the farms down in the southern part of the City. We appreciate
again, being on the consent agenda. The eight conditions are all acceptable.
Janice Anderson: Thank you. Is there aflY opposition to this matter being placed on the
consent agenda? Seeing none, Al Henley will review this for us.
Al Henley: Thank you. The Conditional Use Permit for motor vehicle sales, low speed
vehicles. The property is located at 1763 Princess Anne Road, Suites 101 and 102. The
applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit for the sales of low speed electric powered
vehicles. The applicant currently sells off road vehicles in their shop located in the
subject suite. But they propose to extend the product line to include low speed vehicles.
The staff recommends approval of this application. This is an existing commercial
location in a defined rural commercial center. The request of this sale of electric low
speed vehicles is in conformance with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan for this
rural commercial node. All the conditions, which are eight conditions, which were
previously stated and therefore, the Planning Commission has placed this item on the
consent agenda. Thank you.
Janice Anderson: Thank you AI. Mr. Chairman, I make a motion for the consent of
agenda item 7.
Barry Knight: There is a motion on the table to approve the consent agenda item. The
motion made by Jan Anderson and seconded by Dot Wood. Is there any discussion? I'll
,,~ call for the question.
Item #7
Norma Diane Payne Hewett tJa Argo of Tidewater
Page 2
AYE 10 NAY 0 ABSO
ANDERSON AYE
BERNAS AYE
CRABTREE AYE
HENLEY AYE
HORSLEY AYE
KATSIAS
KNIGHT AYE
LIV AS AYE
REDMOND AYE
STRANGE AYE
WOOD AYE
ABSENT 1
ABSENT
Ed Weeden: By a vote by 10-0, the Board has approved item 7 for consent.
~,
TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
A L'W'TEQ LIAln,ITV PA-"NlJIISHIP
222 Central Park Avenue
Sulle 2000
VIRGINIA BEACH. VIRGINIA 23~82
WWW.lrOUlmanS8n~.rs.com
TELEPHONE: 757,617-7500
FACSIMilE: 757,687-7510
A. J. Nutter. II
rj.nutlerOtroulmansanders.com
Direct Dial: 757-687-7502
Direct Fax: 75Hl87-1514
June 18, 2007
BY FACSIMILE 757/385-5669
Ruth Hodges Smith, CMC
City Clerk
City of Virginia Beach
2401 Courthouse Drive, Room 281
Virginia Beach, Virginia 23456
RE: Conditional Use Permit Application Cavalier Golf & Yacht Club
Dear Mrs. Smith:
I represcmt the Cavalier Golf & Yacht Club which has applied for a Conditional Use
Permit to locate an Agronomy Center on the club's property off of Kamichi Court. Their
application is currently scheduled to be heard by the Virginia Beach City Council on Tuesday,
June 26, 2007. The purpose of this correspondence is to request a deferral of this application to
the City Council's July 10, 2007 meeting.
I have conferred with Jim Wood, the District Council representative, who has no
objection to the deferral and I have spoken to Kevin Martingayle, the attorney representing the
opposition to this application, and he also has no objection.
Thanking you for your kind consideration in this matter, I am
cc: The Honorable James L Wood
Kevin E. Martingayle, Esquire
ATLANTA. HONO KONO . LONDON. NE;W YORK. NEWARK. NORFOLK. RALE;JOH
RICHMOND. SHANGHAI. TYSONS CORNER. VIRGINIA BEACH. WASHINOTON, D.C.
r
~1~~~
~'".. .h_.~.'.' ,~,;\
~' ... ..':~
~,:.;< ~. ,.j]
(1+ ",' <t.-J
~';.~.~~y
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
"""
~
\...
ITEM: Application of Cavalier Golf & Yacht Club for a Conditional Use Permit for
a golf club (maintenance facility) on property located on the south sid e of
Kamichi Court, approximately 300 feet east of Cardinal Road (GPIN
24184145480000). DISTRICT 5 - LYNNHAVEN
MEETING DATE: July 1.0, 2007
. Background:
The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit to allow constructi n of an
agronomy center (maintenance facility) for the golf course. The exis ing
subdivision and golf course were platted and developed in the 1930 s. The
relocation of the maintenance facility is part of an overall improvem nt plan to
upgrade the existing clubhouse and tennis facilities located on Card nal Road.
The applicant explored other locations within the subdivision witho success,
and concluded that the subject site is centrally located to the cou and will
cause the least disruption to the layout of the course.
. Considerations:
The applicant proposes to construct three buildings (maintenance, uipment
shed, environmental) near the fifth (5th) and sixth (6ttl) fairways of th golf course.
There was opposition to the request.
. Recommendations:
The applicant is requesting a deferral of this application to City Cou cil's July 10
meeting.
. Attachments:
Location Map
Recommended Action: Deferral to the July 10 City counCi.l~ mting.
~. ~
Submitting DeparbnentlAgency: Planning Department J \,
City Manager. ~ 1L, ~Wi
"
- 30-
Item V-J.3.
PLANNING
ITEM #56548
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Jones, seconded by Council Lady Wilson, City Council EFERRED until
the City Council Session of June 26, 2007, Ordinance upon application of SOUTH 1 DEPENDENCE
ACQUISITION, L.L.C., for a Conditional Change of Zoning, "Spence Farm", re 03 single-family
dwellings, 347 townhomes and 230 twin townhomes and Senior Housing.:
ORDINANCE UPON APPLICATION OF SOUTH INDEPENDENC
ACQUISITION, LLC. FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING DIST/Ui T
CLASSIFICATION FROM R-5D AND R-lO TO CONDITIONAL A-3 ,
CONDITIONAL B-4 AND CONDITIONAL A-12 WITH A PD- "2
OVERLAY
Ordinance upon application of South Independence Acquisition, L.L.
for a Change of Zoning District Classification from R-5D and R- 0
Residential Districts to Conditional A-36 Apartment Distri t,
Conditional B-4 Mixed Use District and Conditional A-12 Apartme t
District with a PD-H2 Overlay on property located on the southeast d
southwest comers of South Independence Boulevard and Princess An e
Road and 1632 Salem Road (GPINs 1485050352; 148525101 ;
1475856017). DISTRICT 1 - CENTERVILLE & DISTRICT 7 -
PRINCESS ANNE
Voting:
10-0 (By Consent)
Council Members Voting Aye:
William R "Bill" DeSteph, Harry E. Diezel, Robert M Dyer, Barbalra M
Henley, Vice Mayor Louis R Jones, Reba S. McClanan, Mayor Meyera E.
Oberndorf, John E. Uhrin, Rosemary Wilson and James 1. Wood :
I
!
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
Ron A. Villanueva
June 12, 2007
1'1",
Conditional Zoning Change: from R-5D to Conditional A-N, CondiuonaI8-4,
Conditional A-12 wilh PO-H2 Ov~rlay
~~..
f:l:!..... . --.
~f';~;w~:: .~f.'-}~,
....\-^~... -,. I;J
~~~~~~
.._~
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITE"': Application of South Independence Acquisition, L.L.C. for a C ange of
Zoning District Classification from R-SD and R-10 Residential Distri to
Conditional A-36 Apartment District, Conditional 8-4 Mixed Use Dis ct and
Conditional A-12 Apartment District with a PD-H2 Overlay on prope located on
the southeast and southwest corners of South Independence Boulev rd and
Princess Anne Road and 1632 Salem Road (GPINs 1485050352; 1485 51012;
1475856017). DISTRICT 1 - CENTERVILLE & DISTRICT 7 - PRINCES ANNE
MEETING DATE: June 26, 2007
. Background:
The applicant is requesting a Conditional Change of Zoning for a 1 3.B-acre
parcel commonly referred to as the Spence Farm, generally border by
Princess Anne Road, Lynnhaveil Parkway, S. Independence Bou vard, and
Salem ROad. The site is currently zoned R-5D Residential, as it ha been for
more than 20 years, allowing a maximum of 803 by-right single-fa ily or duplex
dwelling units.
At the request of the applicant, the City Council deferred this appli
22, 2007 and June 12, 2007. The applicant has added two proffe
Conditional Zoning Agreement:
32. The [Traffic Impact Assessment] TIA projects that the pfi osed
development on the Property originally submitted by Gran or to the
Department of Planning on December 1, 2006, will gene te 16,651 net
new vehicles per day. Grantor agrees to modify the intens of the
development of the Property from that level originally sub itted by
Grantor on December 1, 2006, such that the number of n t new vehicles
per day generated from the development of the Property i reduced by
17%, to no more than 13,281 (which reduction shall be ca culated
utilizing an intem~1 capture ratio of 10% and utilizing the c . eria
established in the TIA). The Planning Director shall revie the traffic
impacts of the development at the time of each site plan s bmittal.
33. Grantor shall install a pull in/pull out bus stop for public tr nsportation
with covered shelter on the Property at a location to be d ermined
during site plan review. :
I
I
. Considerations: I
The Comprehensive Plan Map and land use policies place this sit~ within the
Primary Residential Area. Specific land use guidance for this site i~ found on
I
I
I
South Independence Acquisition, L.L.C.
Page 2 of 4
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 and
housing objectives of the City. Based on the goals and policies of the Plan, the
proposed development should devote a large percentage of the site to high
quality non-residential uses, thus advancing the economic vitality objectives of
the Comprehensive Plan, (pages 9 and 114). In addition, the Plan states that "a
traffic impact analysis should be conducted [for any proposed development],
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."
Finally, the Plan's Housing and Neighborhood section encourages mixed-income
residential within mixed-use developments. To reinforce the City Council's goal of
providing diverse, high-quality, and affordable housing in desirable
neighborhoods, page 246 of the Plan presents the following goal: "Provide an
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."
As noted in the Background section above, this site could be homogeneously
developed under the existing R-5D Residential Duplex zoning, by-right, with 800
to 850 dwelling units (803 has been used for analysis purposes). It is highly 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 34 proffers listed in
the attached staff report are very detailed in terms of site layout, locations of
uses, exterior building materials, site amenities, landscape materials, recreational
amenities, infrastructure improvements, and similar items.
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 town homes and 230 twin town homes. 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
$190,000. 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.
On the east side of South Independence Boulevard, the applicant proposes to
rezone 2:3.1 acres of R-5D Residential District to Conditional A-36 Apartment
District for 400 units of apartments and congregate care (senior housing). A
South Independence Acquisition, L.L.C.
Page 3 of 4
Conditional Use Permit will be required for the senior housing comp ex; the Use
Permit application will be submitted when more details are available.
The attached staff report provides a description of the proposed mi d-use
development, a list of the submitted proffers, and a discussion of th impacts on
City services and infrastructure.
Staff and the Planning Commission conclude that the details descri ed in the
attached report and insured by the proffers will ensure a safe, vibra t,
aesthetically pleasing community, with an overall impact on City se ices and
public infrastructure fundamentally equivalent to the impact that co Id result from
what could be built by right. Staff does however have concern wit the
unresolved issue ertainin to the one 1 ro osed ri ht-in access oint on
Princess Anne Road. Ci staff recommends that this access oint e denied
and the conce t Ian referenced in Proffer # 1 be revised to elimin e such
access. To reinforce the Master Transportation Plan's recommend tion that no
access be allowed onto Princess Anne Road, past development pr ~ects have
been consistently discouraged by staff from such requests, and the City Council
has consistently supported the Plan. In support of this, a brief sum ary
pertaining to requests for access along Princess Anne Road follow :
. In conjunction with a Conditional Change of Zoning request, the Salem
Crossing Shopping Center (Wal-Mart) at Lynnhaven Parkway a d Princess
Anne road was permitted a right-in only, replacing an existing f II entrance at
the exact location.
. When the Green Run Land Use Plan was modified to allow the onstruction
of the Target at South Independence Boulevard and Princes A ne Road,
Target requested an access on Princess Anne Road; however, he request
was denied by City Council.
. During the Conditional Change of Zoning for the site of the ex is ing Home
Depot at Lynnhaven Parkway and Princess Anne Road, an acc ss on
Princess Anne Road was requested; however, it too was denie by City
Council.
. During the Conditional Change of Zoning for the new Sentara t Princess
Anne campus, access to Princess Anne Road was limited to a ated access
on Princess Anne Road accessible only by emergency vehicle .
. Courthouse Marketplace shopping center at Princess Anne Ro d and Nimmo
Parkway was only permitted a right-in access from Princess A ne Road, in
conjunction with a Conditional Change of Zoning request. This ccess was
granted since the project eliminated three (3) existing single-fao/lily residential
curb cuts along Princess Anne Road.
,
,
. The Landstown Commons shopping center at Princess Anne ~oad and Dam
Neck Road was permitted a full entrance on Princess Anne Rord in
South Independence Acquisition, L.L.C.
Page 4 of 4
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 and Planning Commission recommend approval of this Conditional
Change of Zoning, but only with the removal of the right-turn in from Princess
Anne Road. In fact, the Planning Commission's recommendation for approval
was contingent on the applicant revising the proffered plan to remove the access.
The applicant, however, has notified staff that they will not be making that
change. The Planning Commission's recommendation of approval, therefore,
could equally now be considered as a recommendation for denial since the
applicant has not made the change to the plan.
There was opposition to the request at the Planning Commission's hearing on
the application.
. Recommendations:
The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 8-0 to approve
the request as proffered, but only if the right-turn lane from Princess Anne Road
into the site as shown on the proffered plans is eliminated. The applicant has
notified staff that they will not be eliminating the access from the plan.
. Attachments:
Staff Review
DisclOSUrE! Statement
Planning Commission Minutes
Location Map
Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends
approval, with the proviso that the right-turn in access from Princess Anne Road be eliminated
from the proffered plan. The applicant has not eliminated the access from the plan.
Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department
CItyManage~~ K ~~
SOUTH
INDEPENDENCE
ACQUISITION, L.L.C.
<Agenda Item 15
April 11, 2007 Public Hearing
Staff Planner: Carolyn A. K. Smith
REQUEST:
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 n mber of apartments
from 500 to 400 units; a set aside of 100 units, within the single family and to nhouses, as age
restricted defined as at least one (1) occupant being 55 years old or older; a r duction of
workforce housing units from 81 to 62 units; a modification of ingress/egress f the commercial
site from a right in/right out to a right in only; and, an elimination of an ingre /egress for the
apartment site directly onto Princess Anne Road. These changes result in a ( ) 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 w st side of South
Independence Boulevard to 26.3 acres of Conditional B-4 Mixed Use District for re ii, 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 applica t has proffered that
62 of the townhomes (or roughly 9.1 percent of the dwellings on the west side of So th Independence
Boulevard) will be set aside for 'workforce housing' at prices ranging from approxim tely $170,000 to
I
SOUTH INDEPENDENcE ACQUISITION
i Agenda Item 15
Page 1
$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 sidle 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 townhomes will be accessed via alleyways while the twin town homes 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)-f100r 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 INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 2
vehicles from outside the development and for residents of the community who can alk to and from the
center.
Access for the proposed 23.1 acres of Conditional A-36 Apartment District is depicte on South
Independence Boulevard, opposite the commercial site's entrance on the west side the street. The
proposed apartments are situated at the southeast Gomer of the intersection of Prin ss Anne Road and
South Independence Boulevard. The apartment buildings will be up to four (4) storie 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 adjace t to existing
residentially zoned properties.
LAND USE AND ZONIN INFORMATION
EXISTING lAND USE: Undeveloped site that has been used for crop production in he past.
SURROUNDING lAND North: .
USE AND ZONING: .
South: .
East: .
.
.
West: .
.
.
PrinGess Anne Road
Retclil and residential! PD-H1 Planne Unit District
Dup ex and single-family dwellings! -50 Residential Duplex
District
Duplex and single-family dwellings! -50 Residential Duplex
Sou':h Independence Boulevard
Ret~lil! B-2 Community Business Dis rict
MixE~d retail and restaurant! Conditio al B-2 Community
Busi ness District
Lynnhaven Parkway and Salem Roa
Mullifamily dwellings! R-5D with a P
The majority of the site is currently a vacant, u developed field that has
been used for crop production in the recent p t. There is a home on the
site adjacent to Salem Road with several sub ntial trees surrounding it.
There is also a stand of mature trees along th southern property line on
the west side, of South Independence Bouleva d. The applicant does
propose dev4~lopment and clearing within this coded area but has
expressed a desire to maintain as much of th woods as possible, 5.8
acres, upon Gompletion of the construction.
NATURAL RESOURCE AND
CULTURAL FEATURES:
AICUZ:
The site is in an AICUZ of Less than 65 dB Ld surrounding NAS
Oceana.
ITY SERVICES
MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN MTP I CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROG
Princess Anne Road is currently an eight (8)-1ane divided major urban arterial road
classified as a Controlled Access Principal Arterial roadway in the Master Transpo
Princess Anne Road in the vicinity of the proposed development is completely built
I
,
,
I
SOUTH INDEPENDE~CE ACQUISITION
I Agenda Item 15
Page 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 AOT 1 54,300 AOTT(Level of Total Development
Road Service "C") - 65,800 AOT Existing Land Use 2_ 7,656
1 (Level of Service "0") AOT
Proposed Land Use 3 -
21,212 AOT
Lynnhaven 24,500 AOT 12,400 AOT 1 (Level of
Parkway Service "C") - 28,900 AOT Total Proposed
1 (Level of Service "0") Residential (6,817 ADT)
24,500 AOT 1 (Level of 2,688 AOT / 400 apartments
South 20,600 AOT 2,795 AOT / 477 town homes
. Independence Service "C") - 30,600 AOT 986 ADT /103 single family
Boulevard 1 (Level of Service "0") 348 ADT /100 senior
24,500 AOT 1 (Level of housing
Salem Road 14,900 AOT
Service "C") - 30,600 AOT Total Proposed
1 (Level of Service "0") Commercial/Office (13,521
ADT)
8,254 AOT /135,000 square
feet of shopping center
2,225 AOT /17,500 square
feet of restaurant
1,234 AOT / 5,000 square
feet of bank
470 ADT / 42,700 square
feet of general office
1,338 AOT /150 room hotel
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 INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 4
SEWER: The sanitary sewer along Salem Road and Solar Lane does not appear to ave adequate depth to
serve the properties. Pump Station #567 and #558 do not have the capacity to suppc rt the proposed
development. A new pump station will be required for this project. There is an existin 16-inch sanitary sewer
force main and a 10-inch City gravity sanitary sewer main on Salem Road, and an 8- nch City gravity sanitary
sewer main on Solar Lane.
SCHOOLS:
School** Current C'ty Generation 1
Enrollment apacl
Salem Elementary 468 497 164
Landstown Elementarv 783 876 164
Landstown Middle 1,587 1,596 103
Landstown Hiah 2,270 2,181 120
"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 (feYtler students).
Change 2
-20
-20
-6
-20
**The school division is analyzing if this property (all or part) !lhould be redistricted to adjacent schools to balance the anticipated
student generation with existing capacity and Mure membemhip projections.
School Board staff note that during the 7 to 10 year build-out that the applicant has il dicated necessary to
complete this development, the number of middle school and high school students ir this area will
continue to decline. Thus, any 'overcrowding' shown on the chart above should reso ve itself through
these anticipated declines in school-age population. In addition, the membership nurnbers 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 an' redistricting action
until more information is obtained through final site plan approval, etc. The revised p an will generate 46
less students than if the property is developed undm the current zoning.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of this
request with the submitted proffers. The proffers are provided below.
EVALUATION AND RECC)MMENDATION
Comprehensive Plan:
The Comprehensive Plan Map and land use policiE~s place this site within the Prima Residential Area,
which indicates the importance of neighborhood character and its relationship to co patible land use and
traffic management. The land use planning policies and principles for the Primary R sidential Area focus
strongly on preserving and protecting the overall character, economic value and ae hetic quality of the
stable neighborhoods located in this area. Planning guidance for this site is found 0 page 113 of the
Plan's Policy Document (Plan), where the site is referred to as "Site 7.1 - the Spenc Farm property."
The Plan recommends a high quality, attractive, mixed-use development that advan s the economic
vitality objectives of the City.
The Plan's Housing and Neighborhood section encourages mixed-income residenti I within mixed-use
developments. Page 246 of the Plan provides a housing affordability goal as follows "Provide an
I
,
I
I
I
SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION
I
i Agenda Item 15
i Page 5
I
I
,
,
,
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 Ci large percentage of the site to high quality non-residential uses to advance the economic
vitality objectivE~S 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 traftlc 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 pmposed (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 WorkslTraffic 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 abov1e, 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 INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 6
addressed in the Plan and in light of recent discussions concerning the importance 0 workforce housing,
the applicant has voluntarily proffered (Proffer # 18) to offer 62 dwelling units to futur homeowners who
qualify, as described below. The original submission proffered 81 units of workforce ousing. The current
plan proffers 62 units or approximately nine (9) percent of the 680 units on the west ide of South
Independence Boulevard as workforce housing. Understandably, there is concern a to what "workforce"
housing means. It must, therefore, be emphasized that workforce housing does not ean 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 ow er-occupied
housing for those in the workforce who traditionally, due to income, may not be able afford to own a
quality home. Public safety employees, nurses and other medical professionals, and etail sales
employees fall within this category. The applicant has indicated that the workforce h using dwellings will
sell at approximately $170,000 to $190,000, while the remainder ofthe dwellings will be priced at market
value from $200,000 to $300,000 or more. The workforce housing units will be physi lIy
indistinguishable from the market rate dwellings, and will be interspersed throughout he townhomes. In
an effort to determine the degree to which these values compare to the values of ho es in the
surrounding area, the Department of Housing and Neighborhood Preservation resea ched the
assessments of properties in the vicinity. The research revealed that the average as essed value of
dwellings within 1.3 miles of the center ofthe proposed development is approximatel $171,000, which
corresponds to approximately $197,000 in market value. It should be noted that thes numbers,
generated in February 2007, are based on 2006 assessment data from the City Ass ssor.
The Comprehensive Plan also notes that, when developed, this site should "allow a ell-planned and
complementary mix of residential, employment and other related, non-retail uses co sistent 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 pplication has
addressed many of these criteria, with the principal exception being the amount of r ail proposed for this
site. While the Plan does discourage additional retail in the vicinity, Staffs position is that the proffered
development plan meets the intent of the majority of the Comprehensive Plan's goal ,and when reviewed
holistically, the proposed retail acts as a unifying element of the community, serving e future residents
as well as those in adjacent neighborhoods and the nearby educational center and usinesses, and
providing the potential for reduced vehicle trips through the integration of the retail w th the residential.
Traffic Related Issues:
Traffic Engineering substantially agrees with the conclusions of the Traffic Impact St dy (TIS) for
Renaissance Park, dated February 12, 2007, and is approving the recommendation and conclusions of
the TIS except as noted in the comments to follow. Traffic Engineering's approval 0 the TIS means that
the applicant has satisfied the requirements of the City of Virginia Beach Traffic Imp ct Study guidelines
and technical requirements.
The TIS indicates that with the proposed infrastructure improvements to be proffer with this rezoning
application, the roadway network in the study area will operate at the same Level of ervice with the
traffic generated by the proposed development as it would with the by right develop ent traffic without
the proffered improvements. It is important to remember that the site is currently zo ed R-5D Residential
Duplex, and by right (with no City Council review). the applicant could develop the si e for somewhere
between 800 and 850 dwelling units. Thus, the by-right development potential has a 'invisible' impact on
the roadway system in that what is now an agricultural field has the potential to sign. cantly impact the
roadway network, and do so without any improvements to that system being requir .
I
I
SOUTH INDEPENDEN~E ACQUISITION
i Agenda Item 15
I
I 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 "0"f'E". The cutoff between Level of Service "C"rO" is 40.0 seconds and the cutoff between
Level of Service "O"rE" 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
IndepE~ndence 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 INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 8
. Turn lanes on Salem Road would be added at the existing median opening, hich will become an
intersection with the proposed western access point for the development. A raffic signal at this
intersection would not be warranted.
. At the existing three (3)-1egged intersection of Lynnhaven Parkway and the uthern Salem
Crossing (Wal-Mart) shopping center entrance, an entrance/exitfor the deve opment would be
added to form the fourth leg of the intersection. The existing westboundLyn haven Parkway left
turn lane would be lengthened to meet the City's left turn lane requirements. his intersection will
not be signalized.
. At the off-site Lynnhaven Parkway and South Independence Boulevard inter ection, located north
of the development site, the existing westbound Lynnhaven Parkway single I ft turn lane will be
made a dual left turn lane with added storage length on both lanes. In additi n, the existing
southbound Independence Boulevard left turn lane will be lengthened for ad ed storage.
Public Works Engineering Staff does not support or accept the following recomme dations included in
the Renaissance Park TIS:
. Recommendations # 8 and # 9 related to the proposed right-in only entranc 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 fo the development
onto Princess Anne Road. Princess Anne Road is listed on the City's Ma er Transportation
Plan as a "Controlled Access" roadway, meaning that direct driveway acces will not be allowed
from Princess Anne Road. In addition, the City's Comprehensive Plan reco mends 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 Recommen ations # 8 and # 9
that the entrances will remove some traffic from the Princess Anne Road int rsection. The
proposed right-in would only modify how vehicles traveled through the inter tion. Further, if the
access removed from the plan, there will be no change in the Level of Servi e noted in the report
since. as a worst case scenario, no traffic was assigned to the access point n the TIS. Also of
importance is that the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) design tes this portion of
Princess Anne Road as a Limited Access Highway. To secure that designa on, when this portion
of Princess Anne Road was expanded to its current configuration, VDOT pu chased from the
owners of the subject property all rights of access to the new highway.
. Traffic Engineering cannot support Recommendation # 5(f) that concludes traffic signal is
currently warranted at the Lynnhaven Parkway and southern Salem Crossin 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 En ineering Division.
Using Traffic Engineering's accepted analysis methods, a traffic signal is no warranted with
existing or projected future traffic conditions at this intersection. A Traffic Si nal Bond, however,
will be required at the construction plan approval stage to cover the develo ent's portion of the
cost for a traffic signal to serve this intersection if the signal becomes warra ted and approved by
the City in the future. The bond amounts will be determined at a later date nd will be based
upon the data presented in the TIS.
In sum, through implementation of the recommendations of the TIS that the City's T affic Engineers find
acceptable, the impact of the traffic generated by the proposed development will es entially be equivalent
to the impact of the no-build or by-right development allowable under the existing z ning. As such, Staff is
SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 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 Droiect i'Jua/itv:
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 town homes, and 230 twin townhomes 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
oertainina to the one (1) oroDOsed riaht-in access ooint on Princess Anne Road. It is recommended that
this access ooint be denied. and the conceot olan 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 Item 15
Page 10
family residential curb cuts along Princess Anne Road.
. The Landstown Commons shopping center at Princess Anne Road and Da Neck Road was
permitted a full entrance on Princess Anne Road in conjunction with a Condi ional Change of
Zoning request. This project, however, consisted in the consolidation ofsix ( ) parcels and
portions of two {2} others, with each parcel having existing by-right access 0 Princess Anne
Road. The development proposal met two {2} critical elements of the Compr hensive Plan's
Princess Anne Corridor Study: consolidation of parcels and limitation of acc ss. Since the
development project, in effect, eliminated six {6} access points, one {1} full si nalized access
point was allowed with the Conditional Change of Zoning.
In sum, Staff recommends approval of this Conditional Change of Zoning. The appli nt has proffered a
development plan that provides a variety of housing types, a street and open space I yout that
encourages pedestrian movement and interaction, and offers economic developmen opportunities by
providing a commercial hub of potential retail and office uses. Impact on public servi es is shown to be
similar to the impact that would occur if this site were developed with the existing zo ing. Unlike the by-
right development, however, this proposal proffers to address the most significant im act, transportation,
through various physical improvements. Staff reiterates, however, that the request 1 r the right in only
ingress cannot be supported; such access is contrary to the designation by the Mast r 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 Zonin Agreement (CZA). The
applicant, consistent with Section 107{h) of the City Zoning Ordinance, has volunta .Iy submitted these
proffers in an attempt to "offset identified problems to the extent that the proposed ezoning is acceptable,"
(S107{h){1)). Should this application be approved, the proffers will be recorded at e Circuit Court and serve
as conditions restricting the use of the property as proposed with this change of zo ing.
PROFFER 1:
In order to create a sense of place featuring stormwater retention ponds as aesthe ic amenities, community
centers, multiple residential products along with commercial development, includin a hotel, the Grantor
agrees to develop the Property with the elements and character set forth on the La d 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 evised March 23,2007, a
copy of which is on file with the Department of Planning and has been exhibited to he City Council.
PROFFER 2:
It is recognized that the detailed building plans, as well as the site plans for the var ous elements within a
Village, may change as the planning stage progresses. The intent of the elevation referred to throughout
this Agreement is to demonstrate the architectural style and quality of the building represented. The intent
of the site plans referred to throughout this Agreement is to identify the elements t at will be developed
within each Village, though the actual siting, dimensions and orientation of those e ments within a Village
may change as final design dictates. Final elevations and locations for all of the s ctures shall be
submitted to the Planning Director for review and approval prior to site plan appro I.
SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 11
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 APAFnMENTS 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 de!picted 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 E!levations 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 Residentiral 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 INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 12
Grantor shall record a declaration of protective covenants, conditions and restrictio s (the "Restrictions")
governing all ofthe Property zoned Conditional A-12 with a PD-H2 overlay, which s all be administered and
enforced by a mandatory homeowners association which will be responsible for ma ntaining all common
areas including, but not limited to, the clubhouse, pool, open space areas, landsca e 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 ~ r occupation, on a full
time basis, by at least one adult resident of fifty-five (55) years of age or older. Su h restriction shall also
prohibit persons under twenty (20) years of age from residing in such units for mor than one hundred and
twenty (120) days in any calendar year. The age restrictions shall be contained in Declaration of
Restrictions recorded against the restricted units and shall be administered and en rced by the
homeowners association. In the event the approved site plan(s) for the Property p vide for less than 1080
dwelling units, Grantor shall be entitled to reduce the number of age-restricted unit it reserves by a number
equal to the difference between 1080 units and the number of dwelling unitspermi ed 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 "Ope Space" (the "Open
Space Area"), Grantor shall file and obtain approval of a rezoning petition to rezon 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 c venants which prohibit
the use of such areas for any purpose other than recreation and open space use.
PROFFER 14:
When developed, all single-family detached, single-family attached and twin townh uses within the
Residential Village shall meet or exceed the setbacks and lot dimensions set forth n the page entitled
"Design Criteria" in the Design Guidelines.
association, in which
sts and expenses of
PROFFER 13:
Grantor shall provide for maintenance of the Open Space Area by the homeowne
case all property owners within the Residential Village shall be responsible for the
such maintenance.
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. I addition. Grantor shall
provide ornamental trees throughout the Residential Village in those areas where pace and conditions
permit. The street trees will be selected from the City's list of recommended stree trees and spaced
accordingly.
PROFFER 17:
At the time each section or phase of the Residential Village is developed, Grantor hall install a combination
of landscaping and berming along South Independence Boulevard, Salem Road a d Lynnhaven Parkway.
PROFFER 18:
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTH INDEPENDE CE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 13
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 ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 14
PROFFER 26:
All dumpsters shall be enclosed on at least three sides and screened as required b 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 f cing 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 nd 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 t least 15' in width along
South Independence Boulevard.
PROFFER 29:
The Grantor shall construct a pedestrian connection to provide pedestrian access ~etween the hotel and the
"main street" feature of the Commercial Village. i
I
PROFFER 30: i
One right in only turn lane from Princess Anne Road into the Commercial Village s~all be permitted. Such
turn lane shall be constructed in accordance with City standards. i
PROFFER 31:
Grantor shall comply with the recommendations for roadway improvements listed s Recommendations 1
through 7 in Chapter 7 of the Traffic Impact Analysis (the "TIA") prepared by Bryan B. Goodloe, P.C., last
revised February 26, 2007, a copy of which is on file with the Department of Pub Ii Works, Traffic
Engineering Division, and has been reviewed and approved by the Department of lanning and the
Department of Public Works.
PROFFER 32:
The TIA projects that the proposed development on the Property originally submitt d by Grantor to the
Department of Planning on December 1,2006, will generate 16,651 net new vehi es per day. Grantor
agrees to modify the intensity of the development of the Property from that level 0 .ginally submitted by
Grantor on December 1, 2006, such that the number of net new vehicles per day enerated from the
development of the Property is reduced by 17%, to no more than 13,281 (which r uction shall be calculated
utilizing an internal capture ratio of 10% and utilizing the criteria established in the TIA). The Planning
Director shall review the traffic impacts of the development at the time of each site plan submittal.
PROFFER 34:
Further conditions lawfully imposed by applicable development ordinances may required by the Grantee
during detailed site plan review and/or subdivision review and administration of ap Iicable City Codes by all
cognizant City Agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code requir ments.
PROFFER 33:
Grantor shall install a pull in/pull out bus stop for public transportation with cover shelter on the Property at
a location to be determined during site plan review.
SOUTH INDEPENDE CE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 15
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 applic:able 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 INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 16
AERIAL OF S TE LOCATION
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTH INDEPENDEl\lCE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 17
~
:.....
(\j
C-
;:-:::
\
CJ
U
c
ro
tJ)
tJ)
:~ ~
:./'''.- ..
ro
c
(1)
c::::
Q 0;:.-
~ ~- ~
:... -er.
G -;::
o 0
c:' ~
:L '.;
~. ."
~! ~ c.,-
-
- -
;:: -.
,..... - :: <
f' I ~
-:';:,.
;
I
III
PROPOSED CONCEPTUAL
LAYOUT PLAN
SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 18
A,
.........
,.....
. '"
:..l';
/:.J'""i
"- ,......
'< \"j
,.-
",. .......
~ 1""
:;:: w
~"'V'
-. .........
I
,.-
-
.:;. ~-:;
'"T
OPEN SPA E EXHIBIT
SOUTH INDEPENDE CE ACQUISITION
I Agenda Item 15
Page 19
RESIDENTIAL LINEAR PARK
LAYOUT
SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 20
PROPOSED INGLE-FAMILY
DWE LINGS
I
SOUTH INDEPENDE CE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 21
PROPOSED SINGLE-FAMILY
DWELLINGS
SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 22
OWNHOUSES
SOUTH INDEPENDE~CE ACQUISITION
! Agenda Item 15
I
I Page 23
PROPOSED TWIN
TOWNHOUSES
SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 24
c
o
........
CO
>
CD
CD
U
CIJ
CD
OJ
CO
........
c
o
:l.-
u...
........
CD
(l)
:l.-
........
CIJ
PROPO ED TWIN
TOWN OUSES
SOUTH INDEPENDE CE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 25
c
o
-
CO
>
<D
LU
<D
-0
(j)
"-
o
"-
<D
-
-
lo.-
PROPOSED TWIN
TOWNHOUSES
SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 26
PROPOSED R SIDENTIAL
CLUBH USE
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION
: Agenda Item 15
Page 27
-0
C
co
-0
co
0-0
a:: ~
Q) >
C Q)
C ::J
<( 0
00 CO
g5 Q)
52 g
.::: Q)
'--0
0... C
,.- Q)
o 0..
Q)
O'l-o
C ,.-
.- .......
--
C ,.-
O~
lo... ::::;
- 0
W(j)
O'l
C
-0
::::;
CO
MULTIFAMILY DWELLINGS
SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 28
!iiiiiiiiiiiiii
o
."!::
(f)
o
..c
......
o
......
....
.Q
....
OJ
"!::
(j)
0;
c:
32
:)
CO
MUL TIFAMIL DWELLINGS
SOUTH INDEPENDE CE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 29
0)
c
V
;::j
CD
>-
.....
o
U5
,
.....
;::j
o
LL
MULTIFAMILY DWELLINGS
SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 30
MULTIFAMIL CLUBHOUSE
SOUTH INDEPENDE CE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 31
COMMERCIAL GATEWAY
RENDERING
SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 32
<
, :<
< IX
3: c
~ 0::
~
V5 5
u.; Z
"
< <
....
z
~
~
IX
- ~
~ c
z
o
()3
COMMERCI L GATEWAY
LA OUT
SOUTH INDEPENDE CE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 33
PHOTO OF TYPICAL
ARCHITECTURE OF
COMMERCIAL
SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 34
PHOTO OF PICAL
ARCHITEC URE OF
COMME CIAL
SOUTH INDEPENDE CE ACQUISITION
: Agenda Item 15
Page 35
COMMERCIAL ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER
PHOTO OF TYPICAL
ARCHITECTURE OF
COMMERCIAL
SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 36
z
~ ;:'
-'
~
3=
(5
o
Z
10ol
-
- c:
:...::
.-?:
- ~
-::- z:
"~ J".
___ ,r'
'-- -<
-i
.-
;/'
~ ~
- ,r.
Z 7
- ,...
"" ^'"
~ ~
:.::
> :;..
- '-','
-
:;;
L
<"
~
:.,..,. .-'
. -
'-'
L_
f;. J:
';J',
<(
::;; ::
-
z
:2
- :(
:::t: :e
--
TYPICAL SC EENING OF
COMMER IAL USES
SOUTH INDEPENDE CE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 37
Conditional Zoning Change: From R-SD to Conditional A-24, Conditional 8-4,
Conditional A-12 with PD-H:' Overla.y
1 09/09/03 I 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 i MOD to proffers Granted
4 09/25/01 MOD to proffers Granted
I CUP (fuel sales)
i
5 04/14/98 CHANGE OF ZONING (R-5D to Granted
SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 38
Conditional B-2)
6 03/25/03 CUP (bulk storage) G anted
06/22/99 CHANGE OF ZONING (R-5D to G anted
04/09/96 Conditional B-2) D ~nied
CHANGE OF ZONING (R-5D to B-2)
7 02/08/00 FLOODPLAIN VARIANCE G anted
CHANGE OF ZONING (R-10 to R-5D
with PD-H2 overlay)
11/10/98 CHANGE OF ZONING (R-10 to D :mied
Conditional A-12)
8 08/27/02 CHANGE OF ZONING (R-5D to G ranted
Conditional B-2)
9 07/06/04 CUP (bulk storage) G ranted
02/09/96 MOD of proffers G ranted
07/11/95 CHANGE OF ZONING (1-2 to B-2) G ranted
10 02/29/96 CHANGE OF ZONING (R-5D to G ranted
Conditional B-2) I
11 11/14/88 CUP (adult home) G ranted
12 09/22/98 CHANGE OF ZONING (R-10 to A-12 G ranted
with PD-H2 overlay)
13 02/23/99 CHANGE OF ZONING (R-5D to B-2) [ enied
14 07/09/96 AMENDMENT TO LAND USE PLAN ( ranted
I
I
I
I
I
ZONING iHISTORY
I
I
I
SOUTH INDEPENDENpE ACQUISITION
I Agenda Item 15
i Page 39
I
~
-
;:
~
- ".
.=: J "~
~~
': :: ?
'- -
, -=
~ ~ ~
~ ~'~.~
?;::;::==-
:r. ~ ~ ~
- ':: -
~it.~
: ~~.=
~ "~~
~ ~ ~L
~UH
~ ~-~ ~
i~~~ ::
~~~F.-;
i I~]' )
-<
...
z
...
~
-'
:!:
....
=-
....
!;
...
~ ~ ::
~~1
;!. x ~
z -
.... l./"
:': :-
- ~ :;
~ -
~~ ~
'7 _
~ ~ ~
- t~
:... -; ;;
11'---
- ..... ~,..~:
Un
~ ~ ~-
::.... ~ :: ~
.~ ~ ~
:;. u:. !
~ ';:' ..::
;;.:=
~
~
..- .:.
=- E ~
1 ~] - =<
~~-~
_ ~.=z
mt
:~~~
-
- ... -
.~ ~ ~.~.
:; ~ f; ~
~: 2..
nHl
:::: 5"',~ ;... =
~j!11.
=.2:g=~
gi~ H
- :..:'"'"':"-
:-~~~=
::: :.; ..:. -= ;:
.> :... i: -:::;-;:
_:::-=~-=
z
=-
z-
~
~~ -
L-
:f
i.
-,
:r. < _ ::;:- z
~ -
,. ~
:;;
z
;,-
;:
<
'-
;t L ~
<-
....'7'"'-=.
;;.
-7
''':'7
~
j
~
;;
,z
:..-
-- -:..-
g ~ ~ ~
i!
.~
~
.-
1
:..
.-
-'
.~.."-:
~
Z
~.
f
~OIlV:>IiddV 9NINOZ3H iVNOIlIONO:)
,--.,
I
I
!
i
~
~
~
I
.
I'--.~'.
-- ~
iZ";-
i-:
:~ g
?-,;,
...
;;
... ~
~i
<!
;- ::-
:~ ~_:
i:::
i:-=
1:::
!~
;-
:.L -:~ _
- = :~ :::
UH
:; :; -;; ~
.r = :~-
: "';~ "-'
-= "-' :::::
ii ~~ ~
:;:: :: -- -
-:= -:J..
cr.
.!
;;:i
!'
-
-~
~:
cr.,
-.
,_.
--->
(
f;
~~
~;
,..
~~ ~
-:
- -
.~~
~. ; ;:.,
:'7~
.~~, f
;:"=~
<7.-
~:::: -=
= ~ ::
:..0 :: ,.::.
~<%
llJ
z ;;:;;
..::: "::;-
~.
,
.-
1
]-
- "
l~
~}
~=
~ i ~-
-=~~~
11~!
; 1]:]
--/~;
-/
~
1
i.
.-
~
;
~il
~ ~-~
~ ~~
~ ':: ~
Z ;.~
= ~-'
~ ~ ~ ~. =
Z lo... J ..::..-
~ -
: HI~~
:::::;~~",=-J
~4
- ~ ~ ~. ?
- ~,~ [a
~ ~.~ ~ ~
-:E ~.~"1 f
~-~ ~ = :;
,:
<-
"
~
z
~
;..
-
....
;".
'-'
Co.'::
~,
-:= :.<.
-
~ -
"-~~ ~
':;
r
,
l:
1
,-
-
-
. "
~.-
~
-~ -
/'. "-
r. "...
:,;~
-:,.. '.-
~f-
~~
H
~'
~
1
,..
-
....
~
2:
- .~_:
;:. -
.,
<-
"- - .;;
-:..- 'J
"
'-
'-' -
-- -..,
~
I
I
j
1-5
~
1: ~
...., r.-
~.:;:
:..0 =
~~
"7'~
\,:
, J.
'-
L~
~2
1:'"
!.f
4
~
!~
, ~..L
:..-
".;
.-
:;
,'= "-
~
.-
.-
;~
~/
IE
::..0
i::- "
i";; ;;
" :..0 ~'.,
(-- ~
i~ ~
\ = -
. ~ "oJ
~ f ~
I::: -;
::.
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 40
EXHIBIT A
LIST OF BllSINESSES WITH AFFILIATED BUSINESS EN ITY
RELATIONSHIP WITH APPLICANT*
Equity Title Company. L.L.C
Grcendalc. L.L.c.
L.M. Sandler & Sons. Inc.
SAS Investors
Sandler at Ashville Park. LL.C
Sandler at Brenneman Faml. L.L.C
Sandler at Brown Fann. L.L.C.
Sandler at Brown Farm II. L.L.C
Sandler at Lexington. L.L.C.
Tatc Terrace Realty Investors. Inc.
Tidewater Mortgage Services. Inc.
Tidewater Finance Company
Today Homes. Inc.
Wcdgcwood Associates. L.L.C
\Vestview Plaza Associates. L.P.
*busincss entities \\ ith properties locatt.:d in the City of Virginia Reach. Virginia
DISCLOSURE ~TATEMENT
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTH INDEPENDEN~E ACQUISITION
! Agenda Item 15
I
I Page 41
I
I
I
EXIIIBrT B
LIST OF SERVICE PROVIDERS
Faggert & Frieden. P.c.
222 Central Park Avcnue
Suitt: I}OO
Virginia Beach. Virginia 23462
Troutman Sanders LLP
222 Central Park A venue
Suite 2000
Virginia Beach. Virginia 23462
b.juity Titl.: Company. LLC
200 (,olden Oak C0\1rt
Suite 425
Virginia Beach. Virginia 2':;452
L'loncv Ricks Kiss (LRK)
209 16th :\ venue South #408
Nashville. Tl:nnessce 37203
Fngineering & Testing Sen'iccs. 1m:. (FTS)
240 \lustang Trail
Suite 8
Virginia lkach. Virginia 23452
Kimley-HofI1 & Associates. Inc.
Suitl: 30()
501 fmkpendcnce Park way
Chesapeak..:. Virginia 2':;320
Rouse-Sirin..: :\ssociates. Ltd.
I and Surwyors and Mapping Consultants
.~33 Office Squan: Lane
Virginia Beach. Virginia 23462
Lelvis Scully Gionet
Landscape Architects
1919 (jallows Road. Suit..: 110
Vil:nna. VA 22ll.C
Pagclnf2
Legal Services
Legal Services
Title Work
Architectural Services
Engineering Services
Engineering Scrvices
Surveying Services
Landscaping Servic<:s
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION
Agenda Item 15
Page 42
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. VA 23452
~27lJ5()'. 1
Page 2 of2
Traffic Impact Scn.iccs
Engineering Services
DISCLOSU~E STATEMENT
I
I
I
SOUTH INDEPENDENFE ACQUISITION
I Agenda Item 15
I Page 43
I
I
I
Item #15
South Independence Acquisition, L.L.c.
Change of Zoning District Classification
Southwest and southeast comers of South Independence Boulevard and
Princess Anne Road and 1632 Salem Road
District l/District 7
CentervilleIPrincess 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-1 0 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 comers of South
Independence: Boulevard and Princess Anne Road and 1632 Salem Road, District 7,
Princess Annc~ with 32 proffers.
Barry Knight:: Mr. Nutter, welcome back.
RJ. 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 andgreat 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 servi(~e 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 course 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 reco~ended
approval. I'm just going to spend a few moments with you on that topic becuse some of
the other points that I want to talk about are workforce housing, which is a v ry, very
important component of this application. But first, let me tell you about the affic report,
and even with the traffic report improvements that we've talked about, why 's is a better
application than by-right. First of all, this application includes almost a milli n 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 h e to come
up with, to address the same traffic loads that were doing here that is not con ained in the
study. It is a million dollars that wouldn't be done. These are not just adjac tissues.
These are intersections a quarter-mile away from this site. That is very rare, umber one.
Number two. The traffic report has approached this because traffic for the ci 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. Arid
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 n~duce 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 application 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, thc~ 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 raffic
counts. It is about mixed-use, the Comprehensive Plan, school reductions, an affordable
housing, and a really high quality development. So, we would ask for your en orsement.
We appreciate the time you've given me. Mr. Weeden, I appreciate the indul ence. You
didn't yell at me this time. So, I'll be happy to answer anu questions you or e
Commissioners may have Mr. Chairman.
Barry Knight: Are there any questions ofMr. Nutter at this time? Ms. Ander on?
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 ofthe other. I'm losin . My math
is not coming out.
R.J. Nutter: In fact, the reason we decided to drop the percentages, and the p vious
proffers had percentages. The reason why we dropped the percentage ratio d went with
just a number is because ifthere are few units built, we didn't want to base it pon the
number of it being reduced any further. That was very important and of conc m to the
Council member of not having a good. amount of workforce housing on the p operty. We
just wanted to get to a number. I want to have a guarantee to have less built r any
reason then I want to know it is going to be there. So, at that point Ms. Ande son, we
were using actually we were using 12 percent of the properties of the residen . al in this
portion. Now, at some point, we looked at using our percentage based upon t e increase
in density. So, we would take the increase, which is a whole different numbe 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 th n 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 here 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. I That was
very, very important. They were thinking in excess of a reduction in density ~om an
impact perspective down by about 17 percent. They wanted to make sure th y didn't part
17 percent all the way over and that it was applied to a higher number. That s how they
got to 62. I know it is confusing. We had too many formulas based upon di erent
portions of the property. And, I thought that was going to be confusing; so, It's just go
with a number. That is how we got to 60. But to guarantee that number wit out any
further reductions. If there are further reductions, it is 62.
Barry Knight: I see what you're saying. Ms. Anderson? You've reduced th number
roughly by 20 percent of the workforce housing. You said you've reduced t e number of
housing units by 8.5 percent. Then on the age restricted you've reduced the 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. 1
I
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 of20
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. Ifwe 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.
RJ. 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 thl~y 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 thl~y 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 techni ally about
the capture ratio. Can you talk a little more detail about who you're marketin some of
the retail to, and how they're less destination as opposed to the more to the ne ghborhood
development community as a whole?
RJ. Nutter: I'll be happy too. As you know, retail is oriented in this area ri there
(pointing to PowerPoint). And, we are looking at this facility for a grocery st reo And, it
would be a new grocery store that is currently not in this market. I know ther was some
comment about that last time, because all the known players were in the mark t; so,
therefore, that was the end of the world. Well, there are new players who are ooking to
come into the market, and we're talking to at least one of them right now abo t this
facility. By the way Jay, if that was to hapJ:rn, the capture ratios inside those acilities go
up to 15 percent. As you can imagine, people go daily to the grocery store qu te often.
They could go to that facility by internal road system without having to go ou 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 believ in the
book that we provided to you, we have some renderings. They are two-story tructures
where we have some office above. We have retail above, much like you see i portions of
Town Center. I believe, this is in Northern Virginia, if I'm not mistaken. T s is the kind
of feel we are trying to attract. The type of retailers that we are looking for across the
board. Office facility, office supply facilities, Starbuck coffee, as you can im gine, bread
and sandwich shops, Panera Bread, etc. Many others like that are interested i this area.
We may have an increase in office and things. Right now, we're a little over 0,000
square feet of office. We may increase that. So, it is really going to be pushi g those, but
we're driven predominately by the rather or not we can do the grocery store eal. But we
are trying very hard on that. But it is mostly Main Street service oriented. have on-
site parking for that, and some parking that fits in the adjacent parking lots th t we have
ground level parking. This is unique, and that is why we're very excited abo t it. Not
only is the housing quality high but the quality of the retail is very high as w 11. I realize
that I didn't get a chance to talk to you about the accessway that we talked a out. I know
that your staff is here and part for that very reason. But, I would tell you tha we've also
modified our application to exclude. We had proposed two right-in/right-ou on Princess
Anne Road. And, we had eliminated the one on the southern portion of the roperty
altogether. From no right-in or no right-out. I'll show you. We had propos a right-in/
right-out at this location. We have eliminated that entirely. We're going to ave access
to this site only by virtue of South Independence Boulevard. We also propo ed a right-
in/right-out at this location on Princess Anne Road and we have modified thi application
to include only a right-in only and to eliminate a right-out movement. And, did have the
benefit of hearing Phil Davenport's presentation to you earlier and so forth t all the
policy reasons surrounding this access way. I will tell you that the sole reas n 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 en ofthe 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 of the 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-in/right-out.
RJ. 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. Nutt(:r.
R.J. 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 ofthe 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 Mc arthyand
I represent Empower Hampton Roads. I'm the Chairperson of the Housing E ity
Committee. It is a pleasure again to speak before you. As you know, Empow r Hampton
Roads represents some 35 churches in our area, and we have been organizing ver the
past few years around the issue of workforce housing. We've worked for this d on this
issue for the past 2 to 3 years, particularly in Virginia Beach. We've also had he
opportunity to form the roundtable on workforce housing and we're now meet ng into our
second year. It has been an opportunity to bring together the advocates in our ommunity
as well as the developers and the builders, to search for a solution to try to fin ways in
which we can accomplish workforce housing, and address workforce housing n our
community. We're now, as I said, into our second year of that. I'd like to thi 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, an within our
community, as well as the recognition that there needs to be the formation of 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 ble. And,
we feel this has happened in this particular instance. We believe that many 0 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 ade by the
persons who came here representing the civic leagues. We value the voices th t 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 woul be a leader
in our community in terms of inclusive workforce housing units and other de elopments
planned in the City. We also recognize that they made concessions in terms freducing
the overall density. But we also recognize that they are including 62 units of orkforce
housing. We recognize as well, the shift you have made on the Planning Co ission as
well as the City Council to endorse the proposed workforce housing program recently
I
brought before you, and endorses heartedly by you, and it is now has gone to ~he City
Council. It will come back again before you with the ordinances, and we als , 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 m de is
recognizing that in order to move this forward, that we would endorse a vol tary policy.
But overall, we do endorse the proposal before you. We can kind of argue b ck and forth
about the number. My understanding, and perhaps a clarification, is that, by . ght, they
could build 802 units. With the change in density and the reduction in densi , they're
asking to build 1,080. So that is an increase of278 units, which by my calcuJations, is a
approximate or exactly 35 percent increase in density. I don't know what th~ numbers are
or how to make the direct computation of what 62 units represent of the total I entity. It is
probably a little less than what we like. We would probably like to have it a ~ittle 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 ill(~rease 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.C.
Page 10
Barry Knight: Mr. Strange?
Joseph Strange: The next speaker we have is in opposition, and that is Patrici 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 Driv . I have
my little speech prepared here, but my statement seems inadequate after looki g through
all this paperwork here, I'm going to have to go through the drawing board. .s 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 opposin the
rezoning. I would also like to say that I certainly understand progress, and in rder for
there to be progress, sometimes, you have to give up something. Now wheth that
something is voluntary or involuntary, that doesn't make a difference. What akes a
difference is the benefit of that progress. If there is no benefit, then it can onl be a
detriment. The South Independence Acquisition would be detrimental to the uality of
life from my neighborhood by bringing more traffic congestion, noise and a p pulation
increase. Whether the increase to our areas with housing and/or the business s, and all
these possibilities bring more probabilities of crime. From the comer of Sout
Independence Boulevard and Princess Anne Road to yet another new housing
development called the Village at Midway Manor is just a little more than on mile then a
stone's throw from that, right before the House of United Prayer is yet anothe
development. The schools are already overcrowded, and I know it has beco
for a classroom to have over 25 students, but that should not be the norm. W. 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 no. It seems
as though quantity not quality is the name of the game, and that is very sad. I is sad
because Virginia Beach is on the verge of losing everything that is special ab ut
everything. Virginia Beach is on its way to being just like any other and eve other city
overcrowded with people and traffic and noise. In closing, I would just like t ask where
is the benefit for those who have already poured out our blood, sweat and te s to make
this community our home, our sanctuary, a place where we can go when we an go
nowhere else. But the point is that we don't want to go anywhere else. So, I t common
sense prevail and let the South Independence Acquisition application be deni d. Thank
you.
Barry Knight: Thank you Ms. White. Are there any questions for Ms. White
Joseph Strange: The next speaker is W.C. Rosser.
Barry Knight: Welcome sir.
Item #15
South Independence Acquisition, L.L.C.
Page 11
W.C. 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 low-
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 tIns in closing. I know the truth is hard to believe sometimes; so, if you find
Item #15
South Independence Acquisition, L.L.C.
Page 12
yourself not wanting to believe it, I understand. I know in my heart that we h e an
obligation to recognize the people who are not here in this room right now. en 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 at I spent
some time and just walked through my neighborhood because I felt strongly a out 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 ha e a civic
league; so, I knew I needed to do something about it. So, I started walking ar undo I
went, I guess, which is Rainbow, all around here to about here, which is a littl less than
half way around the neighborhood. I actually talked and knocked on doors, d 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 idn'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 at. People
know that this is not necessarily for them. The person who is going to benefi from it is
the developer.
Ed Weeden: Just pass out the petition.
W.e. Rossler: Sure.
Barry Knight: Are there any questions for Mr. Rossler? Mr. Rossler, there e no
questions for you. Thank you.
W.C. 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 1,1 0 homes
here in the Princess Anne Corridor. I want to thank you for giving me the 0 portunity to
say a few words about the zoning change request by the developer for the pr posed
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 of859 trips per day. The City of Virginia Beach Master Transp:>rtation
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 v,ehicle, a total delay of28.2 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. We are 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 tmderstand 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 oftime. 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 sinc(: 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. Arid 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 pub ic relations
firm. Their right is 802 homes. We understand the value of mixed use but the come
here saying it is 1,180. No. Their right today is 802 homes. That is their righ. We
understand that we are not in the overflight path of Oceana, and there is going 0 be a lot
of growth in Kempsville. We're not opposed to mixed-use. Why do they hav to add so
much growth to the subdivision? Why not hold it at 801 and get their mixed- se? We're
coming halfway. We're asking for things like police protection. Things are a their
maximum right now. I mean, 28 hours of delay at one intersection. Those ar the kind of
things. If we could defer this for 30 days, and say, come back to 11 percent, d that is
still way above the 7,000 routes a day by route. That is the by-right number, ,000
vehicles a day. They're up to 20,000. Let not kid ourselves here. It is three tlld increase.
This is a big project. We're not opposed to the development. We're just opp sed to the
size. We got to fight this traffic everyday. That is our concern. So, we woul 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 residential, but if traffic is really the issue....
Pierre Granger: That residential, and what we feel is, the 11 communities fee , that
residential area, that generates the rush hour traffic. We're not traffic enginee s, but we
get the fact that if you start piling on additional growth without the infrastruc e, which
is no plan, we feel that at least we could do is get it back in good faith by the ity and the
developer down around 800 homes. It just makes sense to us. We're not opp sed to the
workforce housing. We're not opposed to the mixed-use. We're just saying hy are we
giving them such a large piece of pie? Why are we doing that in a system tha is so
stressed already?
Jay Bernas: Just to clarify, 800 units, but you're happy with the other propos d
apartments?
Pierre Granger: We're not opposed. We think that as long as they keep it 80 units, so
that is not 500 apartments. It's the 802. It's the good faith estimate. But wh n they
purchased this property, they were looking at 802 units. So, throw in the mi ed-use. We
know that is going to crowd the infrastructure, but we're realistic. We know hat 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 p with a
proposal. Did you actually make this proposal?
Item #15
South Independence Acquisition, L.L.C.
Page 15
Pierre Grang(:r: 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 Grang(:r: 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 of reduction. 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 ifthey would keep it at 800 units.
Pierre Grang(:r: 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 faith 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
R.J. 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 oes down.
It actually goes down versus the by-right rule. I hope that she will understand hat. The
second thing is with Mr. Rossler. I can only tell you that, and I want to really ake this
very clear. This is not low-income housing. It is not sub-standard constructio . This is
going to be construction and standards above the homes that are around it. s is not
going to be a reduction in the quality. In fact, it is going to be an increase in q ality. It is
going to increase the planning that has gone around this area that has not occ ed,
because individual neighborhoods have come in one at a time. This way it is I done at
one time. So, I want to really refute this concept that this is somehow some I wer
standard in the area. It is going to be a higher standard in the area. Their s has
confirmed that for you. Finally, I want to talk about, and again, it should not e about
traffic as I told you a hundred times (pause as audience laughs). I just want to make sure
they are finished. If it is about traffic, then the reason you do traffic studies b cause we
could save ourselves $25,000 in traffic studies. You could fire your staff, an 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 C(\Il have an independent analysis of wha 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 ame level
of service with the traffic generated by the proposed development as it would y the by-
right development without the proper improvements. That is what they tell y u. So, that
way you don't have to rely upon what the lawyer is telling you or what the de eloper is
telling you. You can rely upon what your staff is telling you. So, I can tell y u that, for
number one, has moved his position in a very good faith effort, a significant r duction.
No matter what you do, someone is going to want less. In our case, our clien is always
going to want more. This is a very good faith offer, and one that is heavily s ported by
your staff. Again, this is not about just traffic. This is about workforce housi g, mixed-
use development, a high quality project, and an accumulation of property. Y u've
always, and your Comprehensive Plan calls for over 20 years ago. This prop rty was
scheduled for this type of development. So, I will tell you that this is nothin more than
what has been planned and for seen by Comp Plans for the last three Compre ensive
Plans. So, it is a good application. I'm proud to be part of it. But, I'm tired f people
saying that it is low- income housing. It is going to ruin our lives. It is goin to turn over
the world. Your own studies confirm that is not the case. So, you get tired a er a while.
Forgive me. I don't like to do that.
Barry Knight: Mr. Horsley has a question for you.
R.J. Nutter: Yes sir. Thank you Mr. Knight.
Donald Horsley: Didn't I understand you to say something about improvem nts to the
intersections?
Item #15
South Independence Acquisition, L.L.C.
Page 17
RJ. Nutter: Yes sir.
Donald Horsl<ey: It has been reiterated that there is no help to the traffic.
RJ. 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 Horsl1ey: Just give a couple of example of what type of improvements they are.
RJ. 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 are 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 of the 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 Horslley: No.
Barry Knight: Does anyone else have anything for Mr. Nutter? Mr. Bernas?
Jay Bernas: I have a question for your traffic engineer.
RJ. 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 of the
conservative factors that you used when preparing the study. From 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. Inother 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 comm~rcial 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 I
Independence, we figured that everything coming in from far out. In other wprds, one of
the things that you do have is that you have a lot of commercial activity in thf. area like
Target, Home Depot, Wal-Mart a lot of other activities. In other words, that s a real
pedigree. Restaurants are another one. What you will, and you will pick up uite a few
trips of where people just don't go when they go shopping. They don't tend ust to go for
one purpose. In other words, you will make your shopping list, and you willi go to the
hardware store. You'll go to the grocery store. You'll go to the cleaners. 'Iou will go to
several different things. We did not factor in any of that. What we did was t~ figure that
was coming in from outside the area. Probably what that would wind up Mr.IBernas, is
I
,
I
I
I
i
!
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. I 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 r. 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 educe
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 imp ct on the
intersection. Pure and simple. That is why we eliminated the right-out. The ght-out
would have had an impact on the intersection.
Jay Bernas: One question that I have, and I guess the gentleman from Empo
Roads, he is using a 17 percent, I guess for the workforce housing. And, I w
wondering, are you dead set on the 62 units, or is there a possibility to keep
originally proposed?
RJ. Nutter: We have to have that part to stay alive. We tried to make that cl ar. I
appreciate Mr. McCarthy and Arldy Friedman, who is not here today. We als went to
Andy to make sure Arldy was okay with the reduction, and he was. This is a omplex
formula. There are a lot of moving parts. There is a lot to happen to make it ork,
because we are putting in something that doesn't exist here. We're taking so e risks
with some real high quality stuff. We're putting in off-site infrastructure and e'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 ig part of
this application. So, you can move any number would be the honest answer r. Bernas.
The problem is that no matter what number you pick, somebody is going to ant
something. And, this is an honest effort to try to make sure that we took an e ort to try
and reduce density, to reduce traffic impact as well. The new proposal for ac ess to
Princess Anne, but still maintain workforce housing but at a reduced level be ause of the
impact on the development. But thank you for the opportunity. I am sure sta will
answer it. Weare just trying to reduce traffic. That is all.
Barry Knight: Are there any other questions for Mr. Nutter? Mr. Livas?
Barry Knight: Ric? Would you come forward please? Welcome Ric. Pleas identify
yourself for the record.
Henry Livas: I would like staff to respond on reducing the traffic for they
way can get it back.
Ric Lowman: My name is Ric Lowman. I'm a traffic engineer for the City fVirginia
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 amain 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 acc:ess. 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
Ric Lowman: I have the utmost respect for Mr. Goodloe. We've worked toge er on this
traffic study and other traffic studies in the city. Like I said, I have a lot of res ect for the
work that he does. And, we did sit down, and we did talk about this factor sp ifically.
But, one of the things that we saw is that with the option that this community ould have,
this new residential community. That is what is really driving the mixed-use i the
residential ~ommunity interacting with the commercial. With that in mind, th y have so
many other options in this area. And, it was our opinion that yes, there may b 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 t get to
some of these things they have to do everyday like the grocery store and the b and to
shop for retail. But, in this case, they have so many other opportunities. If yo take a look
at the 11 or 12 percent, it is very easy to say, true internal to this new retail is oing to be
3 percent but internal is considered the community around it. I don't conside 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 at
obviously might be considered internal. The Target shopping center, and the hopping
center across the street from the Food Lion, and we took at look at what we c nsidered to
be internal, and, some people may consider it to be conservative, but again, w got to
approve this. It is just something that made us feel better about the study. d again,
we're very comfortable about the study that Mr. Goodloe put together for San 1er.
went from a 3 percent to a 10 or 15 percent factor or any of the other factors t
to be really conservative? .
Jay Bernas: I guess what I was fishing for was there another way to skin the
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 eir 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 gui elines.
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? Ifthey 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 re ord once
again, and as Mr. Nutter knows, that the one thing that I would like to see add , I would
like to see an assisted living unit put in there for assisted living for elderly sine it is close
to medical facilities in the area, as so much other inner structure there. I agree . th Ms.
Katsias on the fact with the right-turn in. I think due to everything we've hear today
from all the engineers, and the rules and regulations whatever, I think that sho ld 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 motio . Mr.
Horsley or discussion? Either one.
Donald Horsley: I'll get some discussion in, and we might end up with a moti n. I will
kind of reiterate my comments from last month also. We've ridden by this pr perty for
many, many years wondering what was going to happen to it. This beautiful 0 en field
that has been farmed for years and years. Little bits and pieces have been c d away
from it. But, we are very fortunate that this whole large track has stayed intac enough
that it can be developed as one parcel. And, this is something that we very rar ly see. A
parcel as large as this in the city to developed. And, I think it is going to be a eat
amenity to that area of the city. And, when you get these advantages, someti es you ga:
a few disadvantages also, but I see it as a big plus for the city. I see it in an ar a that an
area can handle the traffic. I think the road system in this area can handle it, d 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 ci . With
that, I'll be prepared to make a motion that we approve the application with t e
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
recommendation is subject to the deletion of the right-turn in. The applicant
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,
conform with the Planning Commission's recommendation.
Barry Knight: Thank you.
Bill Macali: But, you don't really need to specify exactly what proffers needito be
~~d I
I
Barry Knight: Thank you. There is a motion on the table. Ms. Katsias, do lU 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
KATSIAS AYE
KNIGHT AYE
LIV AS 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.
CITY OF VIRGINI BEACH
INTER-OFFICI.: CORRES O!\lDENCF
In Reply Refer To Our File No. DF-6628
DATE: June 13, 2007
FROM:
Leslie L. Lilley r--..
~\,v
8. Kay Wilson'~"
DEPT: City Attorney
TO:
DEPT: City Attorney
RE: Conditional Zoning Application: South Independence Ac isitions, LLC
The above-referenced conditional zoning application is scheduled to e heard by the
City Council on June 26.2007. I have reviewed the subject proffer agreem nt, dated May
31. 2007 and have determined it to be legally sufficient and in proper legal f rm. A copy of
the agreement is attached.
Please feel free to call me if you have any questions or wish to disc I ss this matter
further. P
8KW/als
Enclosure
cc: Kathleen Hassen ../
Prepared B~:
Troutman Sanders LLP
222 Central Park A""enue. Suite 2000
Virginia Beach, VA 23462
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEME~T (the nAgreement") is made as of the 31 ,t day of May. 2007. by and
among SOUTH INDEPE~DENCE ACQUISITON, L.L.C.. a Virginia limited liability
company, and SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION II, L.L.c., a Virginia limited
liability company (collectively, the "Grantor"), owner of that certain property located in the City
of Virginia Beach 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 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 Ct 84.4 acres), Conditional
B-4 (Mixed Use District) (2: 26.3 acres) and Conditional A-36 (Apartment District) (2: 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
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
arc not generally applicable to land similarly zoned Conditional A-12 with a PD-H2 overlay.
GPINs: 1475-85-6017-0000. 1485-05-0352-0000 and 1485-25-1012-0000
Conditional B-4 and Conditional A-36 an: needed to cope with the situati n to which the
Grantor's rezoning application gives rise: and
WHEREAS, the Grantor has voluntarily proffered in writing in advanc of and prior to
the public hearing before the Grantee, as part of the proposed conditional a endment to the
Zoning Map. in addition to the regulations provided for in the existing A-12.
A-36 zoning districts by the existing City's Zoning Ordinance (CZO). the folIo ing reasonable
conditions related to the physical development, operation and use of the Prope 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 rez
WHEREAS, said conditions having been proffered by the Grantor d 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
I
Property covered by such conditions; provided, however, that such condition~ 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, no ithstanding the
foregoing, these conditions are amended or varied by written instrument recorde in the Clerk's
Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia and execute by the record
owner of the subject Property at the time of recordation of such instrument; pr vided, further,
that said instrument is consented to by the Grantee in writing as evidenced by a ertified copy of
the ordinance or resolution adopted by the governing body of the Grantee, after public hearing
before the Grantee advertised pursuant to the provisions of the Code of V~rginia, Section
15.2-2204, which said ordinance or resolution shall be recorded along with sai~ instrument as
conclusive evidence of such consent.
NOW THEREFORE, the Grantor, for itself. its successors, assigns. gr
successors in title or interest, voluntarily and without any requirement by or ex ction from the
Grantee or its governing body and without any element of compulsion of u d ro uo for
zoning. rezoning. site plan. building permit or subdivision approvaL hereby make' the following
declaration of conditions and restrictions which shall restrict and gove the physical
2
development. operation and use of thr Property and hereby covenants and agrees that these
proffers (colleClivd). the "Pron~rs") shall constitute covenants running with the said Property.
v.hich 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 storm water retention ponds as
aesthetic amenities, community centers, multiple residential products along with commercial
development, induding 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.
..,
,)
:\tll;L TI-FAMIL Y APARTMENT VILLAGE
(CO~DITIONAL A-36 ZOl\Il\G DISTRICT)
3. The village depicted on the Plan as nMulti-Family Apartment illagen shall be
developed as a multiple family residential apartment community. The resid ntial dwellings
facing Princess Anne Road and South Independence Boulevard shall be eve loped with
I
architectural features that are similar to those depicted on the architectural e~evation entitled
"MUL TI-F AMIL Y APARTMENTS STREET FRONTAGE ELEVATION", ~ sho""TI in the
Design Guidelines. The architectural features are to include brick veneer on the ~ow level, picket
I
railings on the balconies, horizontal lapped siding, and roofs with a 5 in 12 minilum slope. Any
four-story portions of the buildings are to be at least 100' from the adjoining resi ential property.
The interior residential dwellings shall be developed with architectural features t at are similar to
those depicted on the architectural elevation entitled "MUL TI-F AMIL Y ~p ARTMENTS
FRONT ELEVATION - INTERIOR BUILDING", as shown in the Design Gui~elines" Parking
for the residential apartment community may include detached and/or attac~ed garages, ill
addition to surface parking.
4. The Multi-Family Apartment Village shall include a communi center with an
exercise facility, a pool, a business office and surrounding open space. The co munity center
building shall be developed with architectural features that are similar to those depicted on the
architectural elevation entitled '"MULTI-FAMIL Y APARTMENTS CLUBHOUSE
ELEV A TION", as shown in the Design Guidelines.
I
5. The total number of multi-family apartments to be developed ~n the Property
zoned Conditional A-36 shall not exceed 400 units. i
6. At the time each section or phase of the Multi-Family Apart ent Village IS
developed, Grantor shall install a combination of landscaping and berming alon Princess Anne
Road and South Independence Boulevard.
4
RESIDE:\TIAL VILLAGE
(CONDITIONAL A-12 WITH A PD-H2 OVERLAY)
7. The \iillage 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 TO\VNHOMES FRONT
ELEVATION'", "TWIN TOWI\1JIOMES SIDE ELEVATIONS". "SINGLE FAMILY
A TT ACHED ELlEV A TION'" and "SINGLE F AMIL Y 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. Thl:~ 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 mandatoI)' 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 he 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
appro\ed site plan(s) for the Property provide for less than 1080 dv.elling units. runtor shall be
entitled to reduce thc number of age-restricted units it reservcs by a numbe 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).
12. With respect to the areas shown on the Plan within the Residen ial 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-I (Preservation District), as define in the CZO,
prior to the date the first building permit in the Residential Village is issued. Su h 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. !
I
13. Grantor shall provide for maintenance of the Open Space I Area by the
homeowners association, in which case all property owners within the ReSidenti1 Village shall
be responsible for the costs and expenses of such maintenance. !
14. When developed, all single-family detached, single-family attac ed and twin
townhous~s within the Residential Village shall meet or exceed the setbacks and ot dimensions
set forth on the page entitled "Design Criteria" in the Design Guidelines.
IS. Grantor shall ensure that the addresses for units within the Resident.al 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 Resid ntial Village.
In addition, Grantor shall provide ornamental trees throughout the Residential V llage in those
areas where space and conditions permit. The street trees will be selected from th City's list of
recommended street trees and spaced accordingly.
17. At the time each section or phase of the Residential Village is devel ped, Grantor
shall install a combination of landscaping and berming along South Indcpenden e Boulevard.
Salem Road and Lynnhaven Parkway.
6
18. Grantor shall r~s~r\'t~ sixty-two (6~) d\vdling. units for work forl:~ housing (as s~t
forth bdow). Grantor shall work with th~ Dir~ctors of Planning and I lousing. and N~ighborhood
Pr~s~rvation to ~nsur~ th~ implementation of a program that r~serws such homes for sale to
credit-\vorthy bUYl:rs having incomes between 80% and 120% of area median household inl:ome.
determined using HCD-published figures as adjusted for family siz~. for the year in which the
home buyer is qualified to purchase. Such program shall provide: (a) that the Grantor shall
distribute reservled 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)
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. Outpurcd buildings. as well as tht: hot~l. shall b~ d~\dopt:d usmg building
designs and architectural materials substantially similar to and compatible with the designs and
mat~rials stated in proffer 20 aboyc.
22. The Commercial Village shall voluntarily comply with the folIo 'ing sections of
the CZO pertaining to design standards for retail establishments and shopping enters: Sections
245(a)(2), 245(a)(3), 245(a)(4), 245(b)(1), 245(c)(I), 245(c)(2), 245(c)(3), 2 6(d)(5), 247(c),
247(d), 247(e) and 248(a).
,
23. Monument signs identifying the Co~mercial Village shall bt located along
I
Princess Anne Road and South Independence Boulevard in the locations showt on the Plan in
the Design Guidelines. !
24. Signs containing moving or scrolling text shall be
Commercial Village.
i
prohibrd
within the
25. The service and/or loading areas of the shops, offices and anchor uildings shown
on the Plan shall.be painted neutral, earth tone colors and shall be screened fro the view from
public rights-of-way and/or residentially zoned property as depicted on the d awings entitled
"SERVICE AREA SCREENING" as shown in the Design Guidelines.
26. All dumpsters shall be enclosed on at least three sides and screene 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 t e Commercial
I
Village facing an adjoining residential use and all site lighting installed in ja parking area
,
adjoining a residential use shall be directed away from the adjoining residenti I neighborhood
and shall be downward directed and shielded to minimize light seepage int the adjoining
residential neighborhood.
28. At the time each section or phase of the Commercial Villag is developed.
Grantor shall install a landscaped berm. consisting of a continuous hedge ro\\ and staggered
8
trees. of at leasl: 30' in width along Princess Anne Road and at It:ast 15" in \vidth alon!! South
~ ~
Independence Boulevard.
29. The Grantor shall construct a pedestrian connection to provide pedestrian access
between the hotd 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 (the "TIA")
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, and has been reviewed and
approved by the Department of Planning and the Department of Public Works.
32. The TIA projects that the proposed development on the Property as submitted by
Grantor to the Department of Planning on December 1, 2006, will generate 21,212 total vehicle
trips per day. Grantor agrees to modify the intensity of the development on the Property from the
level submitted by Grantor on December 1, 2006, such that the total vehicle trips per day
generated from the development of the Property is no more than 18,879 total vehicle trips per
day. With each site plan submitted for any portion of the Property, Grantor shall submit a
supplemental traffic projection prepared by a professional traffic engineer containing a
comparison of the traffic generation set forth in the TIA as compared to the proposed level of
development in the submitted site plan to ensure that the site plan complies with the above-
referenced reductions. Prior to approval of the site plan, the Planning Director shall review and
approve the supplemental traffic projection in accordance with this paragraph.
9
""
-' -'.
Grantor shall install a pull in/pull out bus stop for public
with
coven:d shelter on the Property at a location to be deternlined during site plan rcvi w.
34. Further conditions lawfully imposed by applicable development rdinances 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 mee all applicable
I
City Code requirements.
,
,
All references hereinabove to zoning districts and to regulations apPlicablr thereto, refer
to the CZO of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in force as of the date the confitional zoning
,
amendment is approved by the Grantee. .
I
,
I
The Grantor covenants and agrees that (1) the Zoning Administrator ff the City of
Virginia Beach, Virginia shall be vested with all necessary authority on behalf 01 the governing
body of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia to administer and enforce the forego ng conditions,
including (i) the ordering in writing of the remedying of any noncompli ce with such
conditions, and (ii) the bringing of legal action or suit to ensure compliance with s ch conditions,
including mandatory or prohibitory injunction, abatement, damages or other app priate action,
I
suit or proceedings~ (2) the failure to meet all conditions shall constitute cau,e to deny the
I
issuance of any of the required building or occupancy permits as may be app~opriate; (3) if
I
I
,
aggrieved by any decision of the Zoning Administrator made pursuant to the pr~visions of the
i
City Code, the CZO or this Agreement. the Grantor shall petition the governin body for the
review thereof prior to instituting proceedings in court; and (4) the Zoning Map sh II show by an
appropriate symbol on the map the existence of conditions attaching to the zoning of the subject
10
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 i\.dministrator and in the Department
of Planning and that they shall be recorded in the Clerk's Onice of the Circuit Court of the City
of Virginia Beach, Virginia and indexed in the name of the Grantor and Grantee.
This Agn~ement may be signed in one or more counterparts, which, upon execution by all
the parties, shall constitute a single agreement.
IN WIThIESS 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
---- -
COMMONWEAL TH OF VIRGINIA
CITY OF VIRGn'JIA BEACH, to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was sworn to and acknowledged before me this Ll day of
, ' ~ , 2007, by Nathan D. Benson, in his capacity as Manager of South Independence
Acquisition, L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company, on behalf of the company.
My Commission Expires:
, ,
I (
, /
'" ~>
,'; / (' ~ ~'I ,~
Notary Public '
,~\\\\\"mll1fll.?~
~~ '-'AJ .,., ~
I~~~{~?~
1~:'8'" ~~
: OF :
. .
.,. .. ..
~ .. '--. -I ·
._~..:~ ...
-.~...~~
~I"'\\\\\~
/
V. I.
;- .,. /
Ar. \...11
II
IN WITNESS WHEREOF. the undersigned Grantor executes this Agre'ment as of the
date first written above.
GRANTOR:
SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITIOl II. L.L.c..
a Virginia limited liability company
~
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to-wit:
. . _. The foregoing instrument was sworn to and acknowledged before me i' is .LL day of
~ \.,. '. '. , 2007, by Nathan D. Benson, in his capacity as Manager of Sou h Independence
Acquisition II, L.L.C., a Virginia limited liability company, on behalf of the com any.
i
, " I/~.-;'
" ~ .l>1
~.l/ ., t I"
. .',. .. (,oy
Notary Public'
// &
.~.. L
,
My Commission Expires: l -., )) I "l
327985.4
~~\\\\Um~!/II!I..
~ :op.. J. I r, ~,
~V7~."'iiW~~?
. --V<i
. .
. .
. .
. ,.e .
: VI'""" :..
. . :..
e. : ;t.:
· · 6
.... ~~~ ifi
~Nii~'
"''''m\\\\\\~
12
EXHIBIT A
Lee: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 seizled 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 Off1ce 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 hmd 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 of land comprised of 3.98 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 of land 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 numbcr 200404070055145.
IT BEING a portion of the same property conveycd to Spence Family Farm, L.P. by deed dated
December 26, 1985 from William L. Spence and Kathleen P. Spence, husband and wife, and
13
recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of thc City of Virginia Be lch. Virginia. in
Deed Book 2467 at page 2021.
PARCEL TWO:
ALL THAT ccrtain lot. piecc or parcel of land. with thc buildings and impro emcnts thereon,
and the appurtenances thcreunto belonging, situate. lying and being in the City 0 Virginia Beach,
Virginia, and being known and designated as "PARCEL A HOMESITE: as s own 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 Offi e 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, III, by Deed of ~. stribution dated
March 12, 2004 from Linda Spence Widgeon, Successor Trustee under the revocable trust
agreement creating THE KATHLEEN PETREE SPENCE REVOCABLE RUST DATED
OCTOBER 30, 1997, and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Cou of the City of
Virginia Beach, Virginia, as Instrument number 200404070055145. .
14
L. APPOINTMENTS
BIKEWAYS AND TRAILS
HUMAN RIGHTS
OPEN SPACE ADVISORY COMMISSION
REVIEW AND ALLOCATION COMMITTEE - COG
-;
M. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
N. NEW BUSINESS
o. ADJOURNMENT
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTIONS
V
0 I
DATE: June 12,2007 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
I!IlI I
I
III!
IVI
V Y
E-I CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION CERTIFIED 10-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y A Y Y
F-I MINUTES
Informal/Formal Sessions May IS, 2007 APPROVED 9-0 Y Y Y Y Y l A Y A Y Y
B
S
T
A
I
N
E
D
GI Ordinance toAMEND City Code: ADOPTED BY I 0-0 Y Y Y Y Y , Y Y A Y Y
HI a.AMEND ~1-12.2 re increase in Courthouse CONSENT
I-I Security Fee
b.INCREASE Sheriff Special Revenue fund by
5300,000 re Courthouse SecurityScreeners
Ic Ordinance to ADD ~6-127 to City Code Chapter 6 ADOPTED BY 10-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y A Y Y
Beaches'Boats'W aterwaysiEST ABLISH CONSENT
regulations re Lynnhaven River Watershed "No
Discharge Zone"
Id Ordinances to AMEND ~6-32 of City Codere ADOPTED BY 10-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y A Y Y
penalty forcasting garbage into waters of Virginia CONSENT
Beach
2 Ordinances re Beaches'Waterways Advisory ADOPTED BY 10-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y A Y Y
Commission: CONSENT
a. DELETE ~6-165 of City Code re termination
b. AMEND Bylaws re expansion of Commission
to II members
3 Ordinance toAUmORIZE issuance of ADOPTED AS 10-0 Y Y Y Y Y V" Y Y A Y Y
vegetation control permit to Edwin B. Lindsley, REVISED
Jr., re vegetation on Virgilia Beach Blvd near
RosemontIBonney Rd
4 Ordinance to REQUEST VDOT establish ADOPTED BY 10-0 Y Y Y Y Y 'Y Y Y A Y Y
Wesleyan Drive ImprovementProject; CONSENT
ACCEPT/APPROPRIA TE 5640,SSOofRSTP
funds from Norfolk54,9S0,OOO RSTP funds fr(JII
State re project designAUTHORIZE a Cost
Participation Agreement with Norfolk
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTIONS
V
0 I
DATE: June 12,2007 M B L
D C E L
E D H C R A W
PAGE: 2 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 I E E A R I V 0 0
H L R Y S N F N A N D
5 Ordinances to REVISE categorical appropriations ADOPTED BY 10-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y A Y Y
for School Operating FundAMEND FY 2007-08 CONSENT
Operating BudgetIfY 2007-08 Capital Budgetas
requested by School Board
a. Adjusted appropriations to School Operating
Budget:
1. 5555,724,972to Instruction
2. 5 24,189,034 to Administration!
AttendancelHealth
3. 5 30,891,040to Pupil Transportation
4. 5 96,357,08 I to Operations/Maintenance
b. Adjusted 512,108,658transfi~r to School Capital
Budget re decrease in VariOIJS Site Acquisitions
- Phase 1
c. Adjusted 51,185,000 re addiltional State revenue
d. Adjusted 54,681,645 appropriation to School
Athletic Special Rcyenue Fui~d
6a Ordinance to APPROPRIA TI\ 5596,077 ADOPTED BY 10-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y A Y Y
CDBG/HOME income to HousinglNeighborhood CONSENT
Preservation re additional grants
6b Ordinance to ACCEPT 560,000 from other ADOPTED BY 10-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y A Y Y
Comm Attorney's officesAPPROPRIATE CONSENT
540,000 to FY 2006-07/520,000 to FY 2007-08
Corom Attorney reVCAIS
6c Ordinance to APPROPRIATE $38,563' ADOPTED BY 10-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y A Y Y
ACCEPT 510,7I6to be appropriated to fire CONSENT
programs
6d Ordinance toAPPROPRIATI: 549,572 from ADOPTED BY 10-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y A Y Y
DEA Seized Propert}i523,000 from Sale of CONSENT
Weapons to Police Computer Crimes
UnitlWellness Center
6e Ordinance to TRANSFER 51S0,000'5150,000 to ADOPTED BY 10-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y A Y Y
Resort Area Strategic Action Plan CONSENT
6f Ordinance to TRANSFER 5135,000re Virginia ADOPTED BY 10-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y A Y Y
Aquarium increased personrel costs CONSENT
L11 M&M CONTRACTORS, INC. Modification of MODIFIED AS 10-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y A Y Y
Condition No.1 on CUP (approved July 3. CONDITIONED,
2001lamendedlapproved Febmary 26, BY CONSENT
2002/deferred January 31, 2006)at 533 S.
Lynnhaven Ri re additioml storage space
DISTRICT 3- ROSE HALL
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTIONS
V
0 I
DATE: June 12,2007 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
2 GARNETT POINT ROAD, L.L.C CoZ from A- APPROVED! 10-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y A Y Y
12 to Conditional AU with a Po-H2 at 416-516 PROFFERED,
Garnett Pointre single-family dwellings BY CONSENT
DISTRICT 2 - KEMPSVILLE
3 SOUTH INDEPENDENCE ACQUISITION, DEFERRED TO 10-0 Y Y Y Y Y 'I Y Y A Y Y
L.L.C., CoZfrom R-5D/R-IO to Conditional A36, JUNE 26, 2007,
Conditional B4/Conditional AI2 with a Po-H2 at BY CONSENT
S Independence BlvdlPrincess AnmRd/1632 .
Salem Rd "Spence Farm" re Senior Housing
DISTRICT 1- CENTERVILLH
DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE
4 SOUTH HAMPTON ROADS HABITAT FOR DEFERRED TO 10-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y A Y Y
HUMANITY, INC. CoZfrom R-7.5 to AUGUST 14,
Conditional ~ 12 on Zurich Archre condominium 2007
DISTRICT 3- ROSE HALL
5 DTG OPERATIONS, INC CUP at 3750 APPROVED/ 10-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y A Y Y
Virginia Beach Blvd, Suite 1, remotor vehicle CONDITlONED,
rentals at shopping center BY CONSENT
DISTRICT 5- L YNNHA VEN
6 DARK AGE ENTERPRISES, L.L.C. CUP at APPROVED! 10-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y A Y Y
590 Baker Rdre a car wash. CONDITIONED,
DISTRICT 2- KEMPSVILLE BY CONSENT
M APPOINTMENTS
OPEN SPACE ADVISORY COMMITTEE RESCHEDULED 10-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y A Y Y
BEACHES and W A TERW A YS COMMISSION
Thomas E. Fraim (princess Anre) APPOINTED 10-0 Y Y Y Y Y W Y Y A Y Y
I-year tenn - 07/0 1/2007 - 06/30/2008
William A. Hell"st (At Large)
3-year tenn- 07/01/2007- 06/30/2010
Stan E. Cawlfield (Kempsville)
2-year tenn - 07/01/2007 - 6/30/2009
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTIONS
V
0 I
DATE: June 12, 2007 M B L
D C E L
E D H C R A W
PAGE: 4 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
BLUE RIBBON TAX, FEE, and SPENDING
TASK FORCE
Rosemary Wilson (City Council Member) APPOINTED 10-0 Y y y y y y y y A Y y
Robert M. Dyer (City Council Member)
Delegate Terri Suit(GeneraI Assembly Member)
Senator Frank Wagner(Gem:raI Assembly
Member)
Linwood Branch (Chair)
Rob Goodman (local business leader)
Maggie Sizer(locaI business II~ader)
Dan Baxter (CCO Member)
Chandler Scarborough (CCO Member)
James Cooper(citizen membe:r)
Thomas Keeley (citizen member)
INTERNAL AUDIT COMMITTIE
William Brunke APPOINTED 10-0 y y y y y y y y A Y Y
Joanne Griggs
Leslie L. Lilley, City Attorney
James K. Spore; City Manager
John E. Uhrin, Council Member
James L. Wood, Council Member
REVIEW and ALLOCATION <DMMITTEE
(COG)
3-year tenn- 09/01/2007- 08/31/2010
Priscilla Beede REAPPOINTED 10-0 Y Y Y Y y y y y A Y Y
Patrick I. Shuler
N ADJOURNMENT: 6:38 P.M
CITYWIDE TOWN MEETINGS
June 19
Virginia Beach Convention Center-7:I5 pm
Shaping our Community and Ourselves to Protect our Waterways
**Due to this Town Meeting, the regular City Council Workshop
at 4:00 PM is cancelled
September 18
Time and Location to be Announced
FY 2008-2010 Budget
November 20
Green Run Homeowners Association Building-7:15 pm
Stormwater Plans and Funding
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTIONS
V
0 I
DATE: June 12,2007 M B L
D C E L
E D H C R A W
PAGE: 5 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
CITY COUNCIL SUMMER SCHEDULE
July 3 Cancelled
July 10 Briefings, Informal, Formal, including Planning items
July I7 Briefings, Informal, Formal, including Planning items
August 7 Cancelled
August 14 Briefings, Informal, Formal, including Planning items
August 2I Briefings, Informal,Formal
August 28 Briefings, Informal, Formal, including Planning items