HomeMy WebLinkAboutFEBRUARY 24, 2009 AGENDA
II
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
"COMMUNITY FOR A LIFETIME"
CITY COUNCIL
MA YOR WIWAM D. SESSOMS ,JR., At-Large
VICE MA YOR LOUIS R. JONES. Bayside - District 4
GLENN R. DA VIS. Rose Hall - District 3
WIWAM R. DeSTEPH, At-Large
HARRY E. DlEZEL, Kempsville - District 2
ROBERT M. DYER.. Centerville - District J
BARBARA M. HENLEY, Princess Anne - District 7
JOHN E. UHRIN, Beach - District 6
RON A. VILLANUEVA. At-Large
ROSEMARY WILSON, At-Large
JAMES L. WOOD, Lynnhaven -District 5
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
24 February 2009
CITY MANAGER - JAMES K. SPORE
CITY ATTORNEY - LESUE L. UUEY
CITY ASSESSOR - JERALD BANAGAN
CITY AUDITOR - LYNDON S. REMIAS
CITY aERK - RUTH HODGES FRASER, MMC
I.
CITY COUNCIL'S BRIEFINGS
- Conference Room -
A. VOLUNTEER RESOURCES - Annual Report
Mary Russo, Director
B. REAL ESTATE ASSESSMENT - Annual Report
Jerald Banagan, City Assessor
II. CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFINGS
A. 2010 HEALTH CARE PLANNING
Susie Walton, Deputy City Manager
Kenneth Jeffries, Principal- Mercer
B. INTERIM FINANCIAL STATEMENT
Patricia Phillips, Director - Finance
C. PLANNING ITEMS PENDING
Jack Whitney, Director - Planning
III. CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS
IV. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REVIEW
CITY HALL BUILDING
2401 COURTHOUSE DRIVE
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23456-8005
PHONE:(757) 385-4303
FAX (757) 385-5669
E-MAIL: Ctycncl@vbgov.com
1:00PM
V. INFORMAL SESSION
- Conference Room -
4:30 PM
A. CALL TO ORDER - Mayor William D. Sessoms, Jr.
B. ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL
C. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION
VI. FORMAL SESSION
- Council Chamber -
6:00 PM
A. CALL TO ORDER - Mayor William D. Sessoms, Jr.
B.
INVOCATION:
Reverend Kevin Milcarek
Pastor, Back Bay Christian 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 SESSION
2. SPECIAL FORMAL SESSION
February 3, 2009
February 17, 2009
G. FORMAL SESSION AGENDA
H. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. LEASE OF CITY PROPERTY - SPORTSPLEX
2181 and 2257 Landstown Road
2. POLLING PLACE CHANGE - Magic Hollow Precinct
I. CONSENT AGENDA
II
J. ORDINANCES/RESOLUTIONS
1. Ordinances to AMEND the City Code
a. ~ 1 0-1 re location of Magic Hollow Voting Precinct
b. ~2-348 re destruction of paid personal property tax records
c. Chapter 28 to ADD a new Article IV re regulations for the discharge of fats, oils, grease,
and other substances into the public sewer system
2. Resolution to EXECUTE a Memorandum of Agreement with Hampton Roads Sanitation
District (HRSD) re grease control devices
3. Resolution to APPOINT Mark D. Stiles as City Attorney, effective March 1,2009
4. Ordinance to AUTHORIZE a Housing Choice Voucher Administrative Plan and submit
same to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) re Section 8
5. Resolution to REFER to the Planning Commission for consideration and recommendation an
amendment to the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance re inclusion of
swimming pool surface areas as impervious cover and to ESTABLISH uniform buffer
mitigation standards
6. Ordinance to APPROPRIATE $9,826 from the Francis Land House Trust Fund to the
Museum Department's budget re support of Adam Thoroughgood House
7. Ordinance to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE an initiative grant of$416,754 from the
Department of Homeland Security to the Police re Bomb Unit equipment
8. Ordinance to TRANSFER $128,650 from various sources to Communications and
Information Technology (ComIT) re upgrades to the City's websites
K. PLANNING
1. Application of ASSOCIATION FOR RESEARCH & ENLIGHTENMENT, INC.
(A.R.E.), for an Expansion of a Nonconforming Use at 215 67th Street - DISTRICT 5-
LYNNHAVEN
APPLICANT REQUESTS
DEFERRAL TO MARCH 10, 2009
2. Variance to ~4.4(b) ofthe Subdivision Ordinance that requires all newly created lots meet the
requirements ofthe City Zoning Ordinance (CZO) for CHARLES H. DAWSON re lot width
at 4300 Charity Neck Road - DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE
RECOMMENDA nON
APPROVAL
3. Variance to S4.4(b) of the Subdivision Ordinance that requires all newly created lots meet the
requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance (CZO) for BRUCE & KELLIE HENLEY re a
flag lot at Charity Neck and North Muddy Creek Roads - DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE
RECOMMENDATION
APPROVAL
4. Applications of JOHN RODGER BURNS at 3477 Muddy Creek Road - DISTRICT 7 -
PRIl\JCESS ANNE
a. Jlariance to g4.4(b) of the Subdivision Ordinance that requires all newly created lots meet
the requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance (CZO) re constructing a dwelling in the
floodplain
b. Floodplain Variance re construction fill and mitigation
RECOMMENDA nON
APPROVAL
5. Application of STEPHEN C. SWAIN for an Expansion ofa Nonconforming Use re
additions to a two-story single family dwelling at 1107 Cedar Point Drive - DISTRICT 5 -
L YNNHA VEN
RECOMMENDA nON
APPROVAL
6. Application ofWAL-MART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TRUST for a Modification of
Conditions Nos. 4. 6. and 10 to reduce parking spaces, enlarge and modernize the building,
and, to provide more green space, (approved by City Council on May 14, 1990) at 657
Phoenix Drive - DISTRICT 3 - ROSE HALL
RECOMMENDA nON
APPROVAL
7. Application ofRE-BIRTH INTERNATIONAL MINISTRIES for a Conditional Use
Perm!! re a church at 5249 Challedon Drive - DISTRICT 2 - KEMPSVILLE
RECOMMENDATION
APPROVAL
8. Applilcation of CRESCENT COMMUNITY CENTER for a Conditional Use Permit re a
church at 1401 Lynnhaven Parkway, Unit 101 - DISTRICT 3 - ROSE HALL
RECOMMENDATION
APPROVAL
9. Application of CARLA L. GRAHAM for a Conditional Use Permit re a Cosmetology
School at 5760 Princess Anne Road - DISTRICT 2 - KEMPSVILLE
RECOMMENDATION
APPROVAL
10. Application of RICHMOND 20MHZ, L.L.C. d/b/a N TELOS for a Conditional Use
Permi! re a communication tower at 345 North Great Neck Road - DISTRICT 6 - BEACH
RECOMMENDATION
APPROVAL
II
III
11. Application of ATTOM DONUTS, INC. for a Conditional Use Permit re a drive-through
window for an eating and drinking establishment at 501 Laskin Road - DISTRICT 6-
BEACH
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
DENIAL
APPROVAL
12. Application of BURGER KING CORPORATION for a Conditional Use Permit re a drive-
through window for an eating and drinking establishment at 524 Laskin Road - DISTRICT 6
-BEACH
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
DENIAL
APPROVAL
13. Application ofMETROTEC ASSOCIATES, INC. and ARVIND GOWDA for a Change
of Zoning District Classification. from R-I0 Residential District to Conditional A-12
Apartment District on Shurney Lane - DISTRICT 4 - BA YSIDE
RECOMMENDATION
APPROVAL
14. Application ofPRlNCESSBORO COMPANY, INC. for a Change of Zoning District
Classification from AG-l Agricultural District to Conditional 0-2 Office and Conditional
B-2 Community Business District re office and retail space at Princess Anne and
Sandbridge Roads - DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE
DEFERRED BY CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION
JANUARY 27, 2009
APPROVAL
15. REQUEST TO WITHDRAW AN APPLICATION of WELDEN FIELD OF VIRGINIA,
L.L.C. for a Change of Zoning District Classification from 1-1 Light Industrial District, R-
5D Residential Duplex District and 0-2 Office District to Conditional R-7.5 Residential
District with a PD-H2 Overlay at Regent University Drive and Jake Sears Road - DISTRICT
1 - CENTERVILLE
RECOMMENDATION
ALLOW WITHDRAWAL
L. APPOINTMENTS
HEALTH SERVICES ADVISORY BOARD
HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION
PLANNING COUNCIL
M. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
N. NEW BUSINESS
O. ADJOURNMENT
Effective January 1, 2009:
Virginia Beach City Council will hold
Informal and Formal Sessions
on the ~;econd and Fourth Tuesdays of each month.
Workshops will be scheduled
for the First and Third Tuesdays of each month
per action taken November 18, 2008.
*******************
PROPOSED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN
FY 2010 BUDGET WORKSHOPS
March 24
City Manager's Presentation of Budget
and CIP to City Council
Council Chamber - 6 p.m.
April 7
April 14
April 21
April 16
April 28
May 5
May 12
\Vorkshop
\Vorkshop
VV orkshop
F'ublic Hearing
F'ublic Hearing
Reconciliation Workshop
Adoption
Council Conference Room
Council Conference Room
Council Conference Room
Green Run High School- 6 p.m.
Council Chamber - 6 p.m.
Council Conference Room
Council Chamber - 6 p.m.
********
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 2124/09st
www.vb~ov.com
III
I.
CITY COUNCIL'S BRIEFINGS
- Conference Room -
1:00 PM
A. VOLUNTEER RESOURCES - Annual Report
Mary Russo, Director
B. REAL ESTATE ASSESSMENT - Annual Report
J erald Banagan, City Assessor
II. CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFINGS
A. 2010 HEALTH CARE PLANNING
Susie Walton, Deputy City Manager
Kenneth Jeffries, Principal - Mercer
B. INTERIM FINANCIAL STATEMENT
Patricia Phillips, Director - Finance
c. PLANNING ITEMS PENDING
Jack Whitney, Director - Planning
III. CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS
IV. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REVIEW
, I
III
V. INFORMAL SESSION - Conference Room-
A. CALL TO ORDER - Mayor William D. Sessoms, Jr.
4:30 PM
B. ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL
C. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION
I
III
VI. FORMAL SESSION
- Council Chamber -
6:00 PM
A. CALL TO ORDER - Mayor William D. Sessoms, Jr.
B.
INVOCATION:
Reverend Kevin Milcarek
Pastor, Back Bay Christian 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 SESSION
2. SPECIAL FORMAL SESSION
February 3,2009
February 17,2009
G. FORMAL SESSION AGENDA
II
III
H.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. LEASE OF CITY PROPERTY - SPORTSPLEX
2181 and 2257 Landstown Road
2. POLLING PLACE CHANGE - Magic Hollow Precinct
II
III
PUBLIC HEARING
CHANGING POLLING LOCATION
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
The City Council of Virginia Beach. Virginia at Its formal
session on February 24, 2009 at 6:00 P.M. wil! consider an
Or'dil1ance to make changes to the polling location for the
'vl;~gic Hollow Precinct.
The Ordinance proposes that tt,e M,lgic Hollow Precinct
jJolling place be mO\led from Roma Lodge #254 at 3097
t\1agic Hollow Boulevard to Virginia Beach Moose Family
Center at 3133 Shipps Corner Road. After adoption by City
Council. these changes will become effecti\le following
approval by the United States Department of Justice,
pursuant to the Voting Rights Act of 1965. as amended. dnd
'Nill be effective for the June 9, 2009 Primary Election.
Descriptions and maps of the polling place change, as well
as a copy of the aforesaid Ordinance. may be inspected In
the Voter Registrar's Office, which is located at 2449
Princess Anne Road. Municipal Center, BLIIlding 14. Virgil"ia
Beach, Virginia, 23456. .
The Public Hearing will be conducted in the City Council
Chamber of the Admil1lstr,ltion Building iBuildll1g #1) at the
Municipal Center. If you are physically disabled or Visually
impaired and need assistance at this meeting, please call
the CITY CLERK'S OffiCE at 385-4303; Hearing impaired,
call: TOD only 711 (TOO - Tp.iept~onic Device for the Deaf).
Ruth Hodges Fraser, MMC
City Clerk
[leacon Fpb. 15 & 22. 2009
19845083
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINQ
LEASE OF CITY PROPERTY
Tile Virginia Beach City Council ,will hold a PUBUC
HEARING on the proposed leasing of City-owned
property on Tuesda" February 24, 200', at 8:00,
p.m., in the Council Chamber of the City Hall Building
(Building #1) at the Virginia Beach Municipal Center to
obtain public comment on the City's proposal to lease
of:
.7.1 acres +j-, at 2181 and 2257 Landstown Road,
ddjacent to the Sportsplex, to Sportsplex Commons, LLC
I
I
. If yOU are physically disabled or visually Impaired and
need assistance at this meeting, please call the CITY
CLERK'S OFFICE at 385-4303; Hearl", Impaired, call
711 - The Virginia Relay.
/\n)' questions concerning this matter should be directed to
; Rick Rowe, Department of Parks and Recreation, 22891
lynnhaven Parkway. \ 757) 3850400).
Ruth Hodges Fraser, MMC
City Clerk
Beacon Feb. 8 & 15. 2009
19834707
II "I
I. CONSENT AGENDA
J. ORDINANCES/RESOLUTIONS
1. Ordinances to AMEND the City Code
a. S 1 0-1 re location of Magic Hollow Voting Precinct
b. ~2-348 re destruction of paid personal property tax records
c. Chapter 28 to ADD a new Article IV re regulations for the discharge of fats, oils, grease,
and other substances into the public sewer system
2. Resolution to EXECUTE a Memorandum of Agreement with Hampton Roads Sanitation
District (HRSD) re grease control devices
3. Resolution to APPOINT Mark D. Stiles as City Attorney, effective March 1,2009
4. Ordinance to AUTHORIZE a Housing Choice Voucher Administrative Plan and submit
same to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) re Section 8
5. Resolution to REFER to the Planning Commission for consideration and recommendation an
amendment to the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance re inclusion of
swimming pool surface areas as impervious ~over and to ESTABLISH uniform buffer
mitigation standards
6. Ordinance to APPROPRIATE $9,826 from the Francis Land House Trust Fund to the
Museum Department's budget re support of Adam Thoroughgood House
7. Ordinance to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE an initiative grant of$416,754 from the
Department of Homeland Security to the Police re Bomb Unit equipment
8. Ordinance to TRANSFER $128,650 from various sources to Communications and
Information Techology (ComIT) re upgrades to the City's web sites
I .' II
II
.1
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM:
An Ord inance to Amend and Reordain Section 10-1 of the City Code by
Moving One Polling Location
MEETING DATE: February 24, 2009
. Background: The Virginia Beach Electoral Board voted on February 3, 2009 to
move one polling location. The necessary location change to the Magic Hollow Precinct
was at the request of the Roma Lodge #254.
. Considerations: This location meets requirements of the Americans with
Disabilities Act. This changes will become effective upon approval by the U.S.
Department of Justice pursuant to the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended beginning
with the tentative June 9,2009 Party Primary Election.
. Public Information: As required by Section 24.2-306 of the Code of Virginia
notice of this proposed change was published in the newspaper once a week for two
consecutive weeks. All voters in the precinct will receive new voter cards with the name
and address of the new polling location. An advertisement will be placed in the
newspaper prior to the tentative Party Primary Election to be held June 9, 2009 and/or
General Election to be held on November 3, 2009. Public notice will also be provided
through the normal Council agenda process.
. Attachments: Map and summary depicting this change is attached.
Recommended Action: Adoption
Submitting DepartmentlA~enCY: Voter Regist~ LJiJ,L. . .~
City Manage~ l.~1IO\. M ~
SUMMARY ATTACHMENT:
Map - Maaie: Hollow Precinct
The Magic Hollow polling location currently located at Roma Lodge #254 will be
moved to Virginia Beach Moose Family Center located at 3133 Shipps Corner
Road. This move is at the request of the current polling location.
(
II
~~~
,{-l'k"~~;e~
f'<f.'I.... ......':lo'l
rt:! $ -:--;- \~)
~~\~ .:~J
"\~.: ./i/
~~~~. ~-W'.:f'
~~~:~:.,
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM:
An Ordinance to Add Section 9 2-348 to the City Code Pertaining to
Destruction of Paid Tax Tickets
MEETING DATE: February 24,2009
. Background: The City Treasurer's Office recently requested that the City's
Records Management office destroy thirty-five (35) boxes of paid personal property tax
records from 1999, and four (4) boxes of paid personal property tax records from the
period of 1995-2001. The Code of Virginia provides that City Council is required to
authorize the City Treasurer to destroy records of paid personal property taxes that
have been retained for at least five (5) years from the end of the fiscal year in which the
tax was paid. Rather than seek Council approval each time the City Treasurer wishes
to destroy paid personal property tax records, the City Treasurer has proposed to revise
the City Code to authorize the destruction of paid personal property tax records that are
more than five years old, in accordance with the provisions of the Virginia Public
Records Act ("Act").
. Considerations: This ordinance proposes to add a new provision to the City
Code that requires that destruction of paid personal property "tax tickets" be in
accordance with the provisions of the Act. The term "tax ticket," as used in the state
code and the ordinance, refers to tax bills or records. Under the Act, records that are
subject to an ongoing audit would be retained until the end of the audit or five years
from the end of the fiscal year in which tax was paid, whichever is longer. No records of
unpaid taxes will be destroyed.
. Attachments: Ordinance
Recommended Action: Adopt Ordinance
Submitting Department/Agency: City Treasurer
City Manager:~ t I~
1 AN ORDINANCE TO ADD SECTION 9 2-348
2 TO THE CITY CODE PERTAINING TO
3 DESTRUCTION OF PAID TAX TICKETS
4
5 Section Added: 92-348
6
7 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA
8 BEACH, VIRGINIA:
9
10 That Sl3ction 9 2-348 of the City Code is hereby added and ordained to read as
11 follows:
12
13 Sec. 2-348. ~tecords Retention.
14
15 In accordance with the Code of Virainia & 58.1-3129 (At the city treasurer may
16 destroy all paid personal property tax tickets at any time after five (5) years from the end
17 of the fiscal year durina which taxes represented by such tickets were paid. provided
18 that such destruction shall be in accordance with the provisions of the Virainia Public
19 Records Act.
20
21 COMMENT
22
23 The term "tax ticket" refers to tax bills. The Virginia Public Records Act requires City
24 Council to authorize the City Treasurer to destroy records of paid personal property taxes that
25 have been retained for at least five (5) years from the end of the fiscal year in which the tax was
26 paid. No records of unpaid taxes will be destroyed. This section requires that destruction be in
27 accordance witb the provisions of the Virginia Public Records Act. Pursuant to that Act, records
28 that are subject to an ongoing audit would be retained until the end of the audit or five years from
29 the end of the fi!:cal year in which the tax was paid, which ever is longer.
30
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia on the
day of ,2009.
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL
SUFFICIENCY:
If- I~ ~
City Attorn~s Office
CA 10983
R-2
January 29, 2009
II
II
IA'~
.
~
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: An Ordinance to Amend Chapter 28 of the City Code by Adding a New Article IV,
Entitled "Use of the Public Sewer System," and Establishing Regulations
Pertaining to Discharges of Fats, Oils and Grease and Other Substances to the
Public Sewer System
MEETING DATE: February 24,2009
. Background: The City Code Chapter 28 is silent with regard to Sewer Use,
specifically the regulation of discharges, compliance with regulatory requirements, and
the protection of the sanitary sewer collection system.
The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, the City of Virginia Beach, Hampton
Roads Sanitation. District, and surrounding localities have entered into a Regional
Special Order by Consent (SOC). The primary goal of the SOC is to eliminate
avoidable Sanitary Sewer Overflows (SSO's). SSO's occur when the capacity of the
sewer system is exceeded, a sewer blockage occurs, or there is a failure in the sewer
system infrastructure.
The most common cause of sewer blockages is from Fats, Oils, and Grease (FOG)
from food preparation/cooking which is discharged into the sanitary sewer and coats the
inside of the pipes. Over time, the FOG builds up and causes a blockage and ultimately
an SSO. FOG also collects at the sewer pump stations causing equipment
malfunctions.
Because Virginia Beach owns and maintains the collection system and is responsible
for SSOs from their system, it is essential that the City develop its own FOG program
with legal authority to enforce adherence to current state code requirements for
installation, maintenance, and record keeping of grease control devices and proper
disposal of FOG.
. Considerations: The proposed City Code revisions will allow the Department of
Public Utilities to be consistent with Organizational Goals and City policy, to comply with
regulatory requirements, to protect human health and the environment by identifying
and minimizing prohibited discharges, including FOG, entering the sanitary sewer
system. Benefits include: Reducing SSOs and related risk to public health and
environment; reducing regulatory risk; saving ratepayers money by reducing Operation
and Maintenance costs; and raise public awareness.
. Public Information: This information was the subject of a Council Briefing on
December 2, 2008. The Department of Public Utilities staff has held a series of
stakeholder meetings for the past two and a half years with representatives from the
Virginia Beach Restaurant Association, Virginia Beach Hotel-Motel Association, Virginia
Beach City Schools, Hampton Roads Planning District Commission, Virginia Beach
Health Department, Virginia Beach Department of Planning/Permits & Inspections,
Virginia Beach City Attorney's Office, Virginia Beach Department of Public Works,
Commercial Pmperty Managers, Plumbers, and Grease Haulers. A FOG website has
been developHd and placed on the City of Virginia Beach's Website to disseminate
information to the public.
. Recommendations: Modify Chapter 28 to include Article IV, Divisions I and "
as follows:
Division I - General Sewer Use- to establish policy to provide adequate regulation of
wastewater discharges into the sanitary sewer system in order to comply with Federal
and State mandates eliminating sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs) and to protect the
wastewater facilities owned, operated, and maintained by the Department of Public
Utilities;
Division 2 - Fats, Oils and Grease (FOG) - to establish policy and regulations to
mitigate or prevent discharge of FOG into the sanitary sewer system. This will require
Food Service Establishments to install, operate, and maintain a grease control device.
. Attachments: Ordinance
.(
Recommended Action: Revise City Code -, m
Submitting Dep'artmentlAgency: Department of Public Utilities "d
City Manager~:~~"l\ \(. ~Illl\.
b7TC
II
I'
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 28 OF THE CITY
CODE BY ADDING A NEW ARTICLE IV, ENTITLED "USE
OF THE PUBLIC SEWER SYSTEM," AND ESTABLISHING
REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO DISCHARGES OF FATS,
OILS AND GREASE AND OTHER SUBSTANCES TO THE
PUBLIC SEWER SYSTEM
Sections Added: City Code Sections 28-64 through 28-82
9 Chapter 28. SEWERS AND SEWAGE DISPOSAL
10
11
12 Article IV. Use of the Public Sewer System
13
14 Division 1. Sewer Use
15
16 Sec. 28-64. Purpose and intent.
17
18 (a) PUrDose. The purpose of this division is to prevent the introduction of
19 pollutants and wastes into the City's public sewer system that will interfere with the
20 operation of the system and with the wastewater system of the Hampton Roads
21 Sanitation District (the "District"), contaminate the receivino waters of the system. or
22 otherwise be incompatible with the system: to protect the wastewater facilities of the
23 City of Viroinia Beach and those of the District: and to ensure that the City and the users
24 of the public sewer system comply with federal and state mandates under the Clean
25 Water Act and all other applicable laws. rules and reoulations.
26
27 (b) The provisions of this division are intended to comply with provisions of
28 the Viroinia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and the Special Order by
29 Consent issued to the Cities of Viroinia Beach, Chesapeake. Hampton. Newport News.
30 Poauoson. Portsmouth. Suffolk and Williamsburo: the Counties of Gloucester. Isle of
31 Wioht and York: the Town of Smithfield: the Hampton Roads Sanitation District and the
32 James City Service Authority. effective September 26.2007.
33
34 COMMENT
35
36 The section sets forth the purposes of the Division. Those purposes are essentially twofold:
37 (1) to protect the City's and HRSD's wastewater systems and (2) to comply with the Regional
38 Consent Order between the Department of Environmental Quality and the various localities and
39 wastewater authorities in Hampton Roads.
40
41 Sec. 28-65. Clefinitions.
42
43 The followina words and terms used in this division shall have the followina
44 meaninas. unl,ess the context c1earlv indicates otherwise:
45
46 Day me!ans the 24-hour period beainnina at 12:01 a.m.
47
48 Director means the Director of Public Utilities or the authorized desianee of the
49 Director of Public Utilities
50
51 Public sewer system includes the pipelines or conduits. pumpina stations. force
52 mains. and all other construction. devices. and appliances appurtenant thereto. located
53 within the City of Virainia Beach and used for the conveyance of residential. commercial
54 or industrial SE~waae or wastewater or other wastes to the Hampton Roads Sanitation
55 District.
56
57 Reaional Consent Order or Special Order by Consent means the reaulatory order
58 between the Virainia Department of Environmental Quality and localities within the
59 Hampton Roads reaion. includina the City of Virainia Beach. effective September 26.
60 2007.
61
62 Storm sewer system means the system of roads. streets. catch basins. curbs.
63 autters. ditches. pipes. lakes. ponds. channels. storm drains and other facilities located
64 within the City of Virainia Beach that are desianed or used for collectina. storina or
65 conveyina stormwater or throuah which stormwater is collected. stored or conveyed.
66
67 User mHans any person who contributes. causes. or permits the contribution or
68 discharge of wastewater into the City's wastewater collection system within the City's
69 boundaries. includina any person who contributes such wastewater from mobile
70 sources. such as one who discharaes hauled wastewater.
71
72 Wastewater means a combination of liquid and water-carried wastes from the
73 sanitary conveniences of residences. commercial buildinas. industries. or institutions.
74
75 COMMENT
76
77 The section sets forth the definitions of terms used in the Division.
78
79
80 Sec. 28-66. Pr'ohibited discharaes.
81
82 No person shall discharae or cause to be discharaed into any portion. of the
83 public sewer s'Vstem. directly or indirectly. any wastes which may violate any law or
84 aovernmental reaulation or have an adverse or harmful effect on the public sewer
85 system. maintE!nance personnel. processes. or equipment. or which may otherwise
86 endanaer the public or create a nuisance. The followina discharaes are prohibited:
87
2
II
II
88 (a) Any aasoline. benzene. naphtha. solvent. fuel oil or any liquid. solid. or
89 aas that may cause flammable or explosive conditions. includina. but not limited to.
90 waste streams with a closed cup flashpoint of less than 1400 F (600 C) usinQ test
91 methods specified in Title 40. Part 261.21 of the Code of Federal Reaulations (40 CFR
92 Part 261.21) or any successor reaulation.
93
94 (b) Any toxic or poisonous solids. liquids or aases in such Quantities that.
95 alone or in combination with other wastewater constituents. may interfere with the
96 sewaae treatment process of the Hampton Roads Sanitation District or biosolids use or
97 disposal. cause acute worker or public health and safety problems. materially increase
98 the cost of treatment. or constitute a hazard to any beneficial stream use. includina
99 recreation. ascribed to the receivina waters of the effluent from the sewaae treatment
100 plant.
101
102 (c) Any waste havina a pH in violation of requirements as provided in Title 40.
103 Part 403 of the Code of Federal Reaulations (40 CFR Part 403) or any successor
104 reaulation or havina any detrimental characteristics that may cause iniury or damaae to
105 persons or property.
106
107 (d) Any solids or viscous substances that may cause obstruction to flow or be
108 detrimental to seweraae system operations. These obiectionable substances include.
109 but are not limited to. asphalt. dead animals. offal. ashes. sand. mud. straw. industrial
110 process shavinas. metals. Qlass. raas. feathers. tar. plastics. wood. whole blood.
111 paunch manure. bones. hair and fleshinas. entrails. paper dishes. paper cups. milk
112 containers. or other similar paper products. either whole or around.
113
114 (e) Any sianificant Quantities of unpolluted water such as rainwater.
115 stormwater. aroundwater. street drainaae. yard drainaae. water from yard fountains.
116 ponds or lawn sprays.
117
118 (f) Any water added for the purpose of dilutina wastes which would otherwise
119 exceed applicable limitations for any wastewater constituent.
120
121 (a) Any petroleum or mineral-based oils (non-saponifiable) and/or any animal
122 or veaetable based oils. fats. or areases which in excess concentrations would tend to
123 cause interference. pass-throuah. or adverse effects on the seweraae system. as
124 determined by HRSD. No visible free non-saponifiable oil shall be present in the
125 discharaed waste stream.
126
127 (h) Any wastes with excessively hiah chemical oxvaen demand (COD).
128 bioloaical oxvaen demand (BOD). or decomposable oraanic content or any sianificant
129 Quantities of wastewater with a COD to BOD ratio exceedina six to one (6:1). COD to
130 BOD ratio criteria are shown on Hampton Roads Sanitation District's list entitled
131 "Wastewater Discharae Authorization Criteria COD/BOD Ratio." as amended from time
132 to time.
133
3
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
(i) Any sianificantly odorous wastes or waste tendina to create odors.
(j) Any waste containina dissolved sulfides in amounts which would be
hazardous. cause damaae to the seweraae system. or create a public nuisance.
(k) Any substance promotina or causina the promotion of toxic aases.
(I) Any wastes that will increase the temperature of the treatment plant
influent to areater than 1040 F (400 C).
(m) Any wastes reQuirina the introduction of an excessive Quantity of chlorine
or any other compound for sewaae treatment purposes.
(n) Anv sianificant amounts of deionized water. distilled water. steam
condensate. coolina water. or discharaes from heat pumps.
(0) Any waste producina sianificant discoloration of wastewater or treatment
plant influent.
(p) Any waste containina substances that may precipitate. solidify. or become
viscous attemperatures between 500 F (100 C) and 1000 F (380 C).
(Q) Any sianificant Quantities of solid waste material that is not around
sufficiently to pass throuah a 3/8 inch screen.
(r) Any sianificant Quantity of blown-down or bleed water from coolina towers
or other evaporative coolers.
(s) Any Quantities of radioactive material wastes which are in violation of
applicable local. State, and Federal reaulations.
(t) Any sianificant auantities of inoraanic material.
(u) Any discharae of any pollutant released at a flow rate andlor pollutant
concentration that would result in interference. cause adverse effects or pass throuah at
the treatment plant.
(v) Any significant auantity of wastewater in which the Toxic Oraanics (TO)
concentration €!xceeds 2.13 milligrams per liter (mall). or in which anyone toxic oraanic
compound exct~eds 1.0 mall. or in which the BTEX (Benzene. Toluene. Ethylbenzene
and Xylene) concentration exceeds 1.0 mall).
4
II
II
176 COMMENT
177
178 The section specifies the types of discharges of waste into the City's sewer system that are
179 prohibited. These discharges are essentially the same as those prohibited by HRSD's Industrial
180 Wastewater Regulations.
181
182 Sec. 28-67. Discharaes of stormwater or surface water.
183 (a) No person shall connect roof. foundation. areaway. parkina lot. roadway.
184 or other surface runoff or aroundwater drains to any sewer connected to any portion of
185 the City's wastewater collection system unless such connection is authorized in writina.
186 for aood cause. bv the Director.
187 (b) All discharaes of stormwater. surface water. aroundwater. roof runoff.
188 subsurface drainaae. or other similar discharaes of storm water shall be made to
189 discharae to storm sewers or natural outlets desianed for such discharaes. except as
190 authorized under this section. No person shall construct or use any connection. drain.
191 or arranaement which will permit any such waters to enter the public sewer system.
192 COMMENT
193
194 The section prohibits connections of drains normally used for stormwater or surface water
195 drainage, such as roof, parking lot, etc. drains to the City's sewer system and requires such
196 drainage to be discharged into the stonnwater collection system. The Director of Public Utilities is,
197 however, authorized to permit stormwater drains to discharge to the City's sewer system under
198 certain circumstances.
199
200
201 Sec. 28-68. Damaae to the wastewater collection system.
202 (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to willfullv damaae. obstruct. introduce
203 materials harmful to the collection system that would cause or contribute to sanitary
204 sewer overflows. or tamper with any part of the public sewer system. includina any
205 manholes. cleanouts. pluas. pipes. pumpina station. valves. apparatus. tools or fixtures.
206 No person other than authorized aaents or emplovees of the City. shall uncover any
207 public sewer lines. operate any public fire hydrant or operate any valves connected with
208 the public water and sanitary sewer systems without first obtainina express approval
209 from the Director of Public Utilities. unless such use is necessary for emeraencies.
210 (b) Anv person causina damaae to or obstruction of the public sewer system
211 shall be liable to the City for the cost of repairina such damaae or obstruction.
212 COMMENT
213
214 The section (1) prohibits willful damage to the public sewer system or the introduction of
215 materials into the system that would cause or contribute to sanitary sewer overflows; and (2)
216 renders any such person liable to the City for the cost of repair.
217
218
5
219 Sec. 28-69. Inspections.
220
221 (a) The Director shall have authority to make such lawful inspections durina
222 reasonable hours for the purpose of observina. measurina. samplina. testina or
223 reviewina records of the wastewater collection system installed in any buildina or
224 structure as may be necessary or appropriate. includina inspections performed for the
225 purpose of ensurina that discharae to the City's public sanitary sewer system from such
226 buildina or structure is not in violation of this Division. The owner or occupant of such
227 buildina or structure. or his or her desianee. shall be entitled to accompany the Director
228 durina such inspection.
229
230 COMMENT
231
232 The section authorizes lawful inspections by the Director of Public Utilities under the
233 circumstances slet forth in the section and allows the owner of occupant to accompany the Director
234 during such inspections.
235
236 Sec. 28-70. Violations and penalties.
237 (a) Any intentional or willful act or omission to act in violation of any of the
238 provisions of this Division shall be punishable by fine in an amount not to exceed One
239 Thousand Dol~$1 ,000.00) per violation. Each day that a continuina violation exists
240 shall constitute a separate offense. The court assessina such fines may. at its
241 discretion. order such fines to be paid into the treasury of the City for the purpose of
242 abatina. preventina or mitiaatina environmental pollution.
243 (b) Any person who. intentionally or otherwise. commits any of the acts
244 prohibited by this Division or who fails to perform any of the acts reauired by this
245 Division shall be liable to the City in an action at law for all costs of containment.
246 cleanup. abate!ment. removal and disposal of any substance unlawfully discharaed into
247 the wastewater collection system. as well as the costs of any damaaes or reaulatory
248 fines imposed upon the City. that are proximately caused by such violations. Such
249 costs shall be Gollectible by the City in accordance with the provisions of Sections 28-29
250 and 28-30.
251 (c) The City may brina leaal action to enioin the continuina violation of this
252 division, and the existence of any other remedy. at law or in eauity, shall be no defense
253 to any such action.
254 (d) The remedies set forth in this section shall be cumulative, not exclusive:
255 and it shall not be a defense to any action. civil or criminal. that one or more of the
256 remedies set forth herein has been souaht or aranted.
6
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
II
II
COMMENT
The section sets forth the criminal penalties and civil remedies for violations of the Division.
Intentional or willful violations are punishable by a fine not exceeding $1,000. In addition, violators
are liable to the City in an action at law for the costs of containment, cleanup, abatement, removal
and disposal of any substance unlawfully discharged into the wastewater collection system and are
subject to injunction by the City against continuing violations of the Division. The remedies are
cumulative in nature, such that the City may pursue any or all of them.
Sec. 28-71. Variances.
The Director may authorize a variance from the provisions of Section 28-67 or
28-68 in any case in which a property owner or other person demonstrates that strict
compliance with the provision from which a variance is souaht would cause undue
hardship or extraordinary expense and the Director is satisfied that the authorization of
the variance will not adversely affect the public sewer system. In such cases. the
Director shall impose such reasonable conditions as will ensure, to the extent possible,
that the variance does not adversely affect the public sewer system.
COMMENT
The section allows the Director of Public Utilities to grant variances in cases where strict
compliance with the terms of the ordinance would cause extraordinary expense or hardship. In
such cases, the Director must impose conditions designed to ensure that the variance will not
adversely affect the public sewer system.
Sec. 28-72. Severability.
The provisions of this Division shall be severable, it beina the intention of the City
Council that in the event one (1) or more of the provisions of this Division are adiudaed
to be invalid or unenforceable, the validity and enforceability of the remainina provisions
shall be unaffected by such adiudication.
COMMENT
The standard severability language is set forth in this section. It provides that the entire
Division is not rendered invalid in the event one of its provisions is adjudged to be invalid or
unenforceable.
Division 2. Fats, Oils, and Grease (FOG)
Sec. 28-73.
Purpose; findinas.
(a) Purpose. The purpose of this Division is to aid in preventina the
introduction and accumulation of fats. oils, and arease (FOG), which cause or tend to
cause or contribute to sanitary sewer blockaaes and obstructions, into the municipal
wastewater system. This Division reQuires that arease control devices be installed,
7
301 implemented. and maintained by food service establishments in accordance with the
302 provisions henaof.
303
(b)
Findinas. The City Council hereby finds that:
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
!.1) Grease buildup in the public sewer system occurs when FOG from
cooking is allowed to be introduced into the system. FOG washed
down sinks and floor drains builds UP over time and eventually
creates backups in the public sewer system which may result in
sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs). SSOs constitute significant
public health hazards. expose the city to costly environmental
penalties. and are prohibited under the federal Clean Water Act. In
2008. thirty-eight (38) SSOs within the City were caused by
accumulations of FOG in the public sewer system.
313
314
315
316
317
318
,G2) The accumulation of FOG in the public sewer system leads to
increased costs for maintaining sewers and wastewater treatment
plants and cleaning blockages out of public and private property.
During 2008. the Department of Public Utilities responded to 3.105
sewer blockages caused by accumulations of FOG in the public
sewer system.
319
320
321
322
Gn FOG from food service establishments is a maior source of FOG in
the public sewer system. The use of properly sized. installed and
maintained grease control devices in food service establishments.
however. minimizes the introduction of FOG into the system.
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
~~) The Special Order by Consent issued to the City of Virginia Beach
and other localities and service providers within Hampton Roads.
which became effective on September 26. 2007. reauires the City.
among other things. to develop and submit to the Virainia
Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) a Maintenance.
Operations and Manaaement (MOM) Plan that documents the
MOM Plan elements used to manage the City's sewer system and
minimize SSOs.
331 COMMENT
332 The section sets forth the purposes of the Division and recites the findings upon which the
333 provisions of th.~ Division are based. The essence of the findings is that FOG is a major
334 contributor to bh)ckages in the public sewer system, and that blockages are one of the causes of
335 sanitary sewer overflows, which are a public health hazard, prohibited by the Clean Water Act and
336 expensive to respond to. A key finding is that, while FOG from food service establishments is a
337 leading cause of sewer obstructions, properly sized, installed and maintained grease control devices
338 can minimize the discharge of FOG into the City's sewer system.
339
8
II
II
340 Sec. 28-74. Applicability.
341 The provisions of this Division shall applv to all food service establishments. as
342 defined herein. within the City that are required under the Vircinia Uniform Statewide
343 Buildinc Code or applicable reculations of the Hampton Roads Sanitation District to
344 have crease control devices and to all crease haulers providina service to any such
345 food service establishment.
346 COMMENT
347
348 The section sets forth the establishments to which the Division applies by reference to the
349 Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code (USBC) and HRSD regulations, which allow HRSD to
350 require retrofitting of establishments otherwise grandfathered by the USBC.
351
352
353 Sec. 28-75. Definitions.
354
355 The followina words and terms used in this Division shall have the followina
356 meanincs. unless the context clearlv indicates otherwise:
357-
358 Brown qrease means floatable fats, oils. crease and settled solids produced
359 durinc food preparation that are recovered from arease control devices.
360
361 Buildinq Code Administrator means the City's Buildina Code Administrator or his
362 or her authorized desianee. The Buildinc Code Administrator is referred to .in the
363 Virainia Uniform Statewide Buildina Code as the Buildina Official.
364
365 Director means the City's Director of Public Utilities or his or her authorized
366 desianee.
367
368 Enforcement Response Plan means a system that sets forth the process and
369 procedures for enforcement of this section bv the City
370
371 Fats, oils. and qrease (FOG) means material. either liquid or solid. composed of
372 fats. oils or arease from animal or veaetable sources. Examples of FOG include. but
373 are not limited to. kitchen cookina crease. vecetable oil. bacon arease and orcanic polar
374 compounds derived from animal or plant sources that contain multiple carbon
375 triclvceride molecules. These substances are detectable and measurable usina
376 analytical test procedures established in the Title 40. Part 135 of the Code of Federal
377 Reaulations (40 CFR 136). as may be amended from time to time.
378
379 Food service establishment (FSE) means any commercial. institutional. or food
380 processina facility that discharaes kitchen or food preparation wastewaters and that is
381 required to have a crease control device under the Vircinia Uniform Buildinc Code or
382 applicable reculations of the Hampton Roads Sanitation District.
383
9
384 Grease control device means a device used to collect. contain. and remove food
385 waste and arease from the wastewater while allowina the remainina wastewater to be
386 discharaed to the City's wastewater collection system by aravity. Devices include
387 arease interceptors. arease traps. automatic arease removal devices or other devices
388 approved by the Director.
389
390 Grease hauler means a contractor who collects the contents of a arease
391 interceptor or trap and transports it to a recyclina or disposal facility. A arease hauler
392 may also provide other services related to arease interceptor maintenance for a Food
393 service establi~)hment.
394
395 Grease interceotor means a structure or device. usually located underaround and
396 outside of a Food service establishment. desianed to collect. contain and remove food
397 waste and arease from the wastewater while allowina the remainina wastewater to be
398 discharaed to the City's wastewater collection system byaravity.
399
400 Grease removal device means an active. automatic device that separates and
401 removes fats. oils and arease from effluent discharae and that cleans itself of
402 accumulated FOG at least once every twenty-four hours utilizina electromechanical
403 apparatus.
404
405 Grease trao means a device typically located indoors and under the sink.
406 desianed for sl3paratina and retainina arease prior to the wastewater exitina the trap
407 and enterina the wastewater collection system. Such devices are typically passive
408 (aravity fed) and compact with removable baffles.
409
410 Public Sj9Wer system includes the pipelines or conduits. pumpina stations. force
411 mains. and all ()ther construction. devices. and appliances appurtenant thereto. located
412 within the City of Virainia Beach and used for the conveyance of residential. commercial
413 or industrial sewaae or wastewater or other wastes to the Hampton Roads Sanitation
414 District.
415
416 Renderable FOG container means a closed. leak-proof container for the
417 collection and storaae of yellow arease.
418
419 Virqinia Uniform Statewide Buildina Code includes the model codes incorporated
420 by reference thl:!rein. includina. specifically. the International Plumbina Code.
421
422 Yellow orease means fats. oils. and arease used in food preparation that have
423 not been in contact or contaminated with other sources such as water. wastewater or
424 solid waste. An example of yellow arease is fryer oil. which can be recycled into
425 products such iBS animal feed. cosmetics and alternative fuel. Yellow arease is also
426 referred to as rE!nderable FOG.
427
428 COMMENT
429
430 The section sets forth the definitions of terms used in the ordinance.
10
II
II
431
432 Sec. 28-76. ReQistration reauirements.
433
434 All food service establishments shall be required to reaister their arease control
435 devices. Reaistrations shall be on forms provided by the Director to ensure that such
436 devices are properly sized and maintained and to facilitate inspection in accordance
437 with the requirements established by the Director.
438
439 (a) Existina food service establishments shall reaister all arease control
440 devices within ninety (90) days after the effective date of this Division:
441 provided. New establishments shall reaister such devices when
442 reQuestina their water and sewer service. applyina for a business license.
443 or prior to obtainina a certificate of occupancy. whichever is later.
444
445 (b) All arease haulers servicina arease control devices for food service
446 establishments within the City shall be required to obtain a certification to
447 service arease control devices from the City or the Hampton Roads
448 Plannina District Commission no later than ninety (90) days after the
449 effective date of this Division.
450
451 c) All drease haulers shall obtain the required permits. certifications or
452 approvals from the facility in which waste will be disposed of. Grease
453 haulers discharaina to a Hampton Roads Sanitation District treatment
454 plant shall be approved throuah a Hampton Roads Sanitation District
455 Indirect Wastewater Discharae Permit.
456
457 d) At least one employee of a food service establishment shall have
458 completed a trainina proaram concernina the operation and maintenance
459 of arease control devices. provided by the City. no later than ninety (90)
460 days after the effective date of this Division.
461
462 COMMENT
463
464 The section requires that: (1) food service establishments register their grease control
465 devices with the City; (2) grease haulers servicing grease control devices for food service
466 establishments within the City obtain a certification to service grease control devices from the City
467 or the Hampton Roads Planning District Commission; (3) grease haulers obtain all necessary
468 approvals from the facility in which the waste they carry will be disposed of; and (4) at least one
469 employee of every food service establishment complete a training course on the operation and
470 maintenance of grease controls devices.
471
472 Sec. 28-77. DischarQe limits.
473
474 No person shall discharae or cause to be discharaed from any food service
475 establishment any wastewater with fats. oils. arease or other substances harmful or
476 hazardous to the public sewer system. the reaional sanitary sewer system. or sewaae
477 treatment plant or processes. as determined by Section 301 (d) of the Hampton Roads
1"1
478 Sanitation District's Industrial Wastewater Discharae Reaulations or any successor
479 reaulation.
480
481 COMMENT
482
483 The section prohibits the discharge of FOG or other substances that are harmful or
484 hazardous to ttte public sewer system, regional sewer system, or HRSD's treatment plant or
485 processes.
486
487 Sec. 28-78. Grease Control Devices.
488 (a) Ii~eauirements. All food service establishments shall have a arease
489 control device or devices meetina all applicable reQuirements of the Virainia Uniform
490 Statewide Suildino Code. as determined by the Suildina Code Administrator. Any
491 arease control device sized in accordance with the "Hampton Roads Reaional
492 Technical Stal1dards. Sizino of Grease Control Devices" shall be deemed to meet the
493 reQuirements of the section.
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
0)
~~)
Q)
f4)
New establishments. Except as provided in subdivision (a)(2). food
service establishments shall be reQuired to install. operate. and
maintain a arease control device in compliance with the
reQuirements of the Virainia Uniform Statewide Suildina Code.
Grease control devices shall be installed and reaistered prior to the
issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
Existinq establishments. Food services establishments in operation
as of the effective date of this Division may continue to operate and
maintain their existina orease control devices. provided such
orease control devices are in proper operatina condition and are
not found to be contributina FOG in Quantities sufficient to cause
line stoppaaes or to necessitate increased maintenance of the
sanitary sewer system. An existina food service establishment
shall install a new arease control device that complies with the
reQuirements of the Uniform Statewide Suildino Code if its arease
control device is determined by the Director not to be in proper
operatina condition or if is found to be contributina FOG in
Quantities sufficient to cause line stoppaaes or to necessitate
increased maintenance of the sanitary sewer system.
Renovations or expansions. Food service establishments that are
renovated. or expanded shall. if reQuired by the Virainia Uniform
Statewide Suildino Code. install new arease control devices
meetino the reQuirements of such Code.
Retrofittinq. Existing establishments lackino approved orease
control devices by reason of havina been orandfathered from such
reQuirement under the Viroinia Uniform Statewide Suildina Code
12
II
II
523
524
525
526
shall. if reQuired by the Hampton Roads Sanitation District. install
arease control devices in accordance with the reaulations of the
District. Such arease control devices shall be reaistered within
thirty (30) days of their installation.
527 (b) Installation. Grease control devices shall be installed by a plumber
528 licensed in the Commonwealth of Virainia. Every arease control device shall be
529 installed and connected so that it may be readily accessible for inspection. cleanina.
530 and removal of the intercepted food waste and arease at any time.
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
(c)
Maintenance. Grease control devices shall be maintained as follows:
(1) Grease control devices shall be properly maintained at all times.
Maintenance shall include the complete removal of all contents.
includina f10atina material. wastewater and settled solids.
Decantina or discharaina of removed waste back into the arease
interceptor or private sewer line or into any portion of the City's or
HRSD's wastewater collection system is prohibited.
(2) Grease interceptors shall be pumped out completely when the total
accumulation of surface fats. oils and arease. includina f10atina
solids and settled solids. reaches twenty-five percent (25%) of the
overall liQuid volume. At no time shall a arease control device be
cleaned less freQuently than once every three (3) months unless
allowed by the Director for aood cause shown. Approval will be
granted on a case-by-case basis upon submittal of a reQuest by the
food service establishment documentina reasons for the proposed
freQuency variance. The Director shall not approve any reQuest
unless the applicant demonstrates that the freQuency variance will
not result in the introduction of any areater Quantities of FOG into
the public sewer system than would otherwise be introduced.
(3) Grease traps and arease removal devices shall be opened.
inspected and completely cleaned of food solids and fats. oils and
grease a minimum of once per week. unless allowed by the
Director for aood cause shown. Approval will be aranted on a
case-by-case basis upon submittal of a reQuest by the food service
establishment documentinQ reasons for the proposed freQuency
variance. The Director shall not approve any reQuest unless the
applicant demonstrates that the freQuency variance will not result in
the introduction of any areater Quantities of FOG into the public
sewer system than would otherwise be introduced. and in no event
shall the content of food solids and fats. oils. and arease exceed
twenty-five percent (25%) of the overall liQuid depth of the device.
(4) The Director of Public Utilities may establish a more freQuent
cleanina schedule if the food service establishment is found to be
13
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
contributina FOG in auantities sufficient to cause line stoppaaes or
to necessitate increased maintenance of the wastewater collection
system.
{5) Unless authorized by the Director, the use of additives includina.
but not limited to. products that contain solvents. emulsifiers.
surfactants. caustics. acids. enzymes or bacteria are prohibited for
use as arease manaaement control: provided. however. that
additives may be used to clean the FSE drain lines so lona as the
usaae of such additives will not cause FOG to be discharaed from
the arease control device to the sanitary sewer system. The use of
additives shall not be substituted for the maintenance procedures
reauired by this Section. The Director shall not approve the use of
any additives unless he is satisfied that such use will have no
adverse effects upon the public sewer system.
582 (d) LJVaste Disposal. Waste material from arease control devices shall be
583 disposed of as follows:
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
t1) Waste removed from a arease trap shall be disposed of in the solid
waste disposal system or by a arease hauler certified by the
Hampton Roads Plannina District Commission.
Gn Waste removed from a arease interceptor shall be disposed of at a
facility permitted to receive such wastes. No materials removed
from interceptors shall be returned to any arease interceptor.
private sewer line or into any portion of the City's or HRSD's
wastewater collection system.
~I) Yellow arease shall be disposed of in a renderable FOG container
in which contents will not be discharaed to the environment. Yellow
arease shall not be poured or discharaed into the City's or HRSD's
wastewater collection system.
598 (e) Inspection. The Director shall have the authority to make such lawful
599 inspections as are authorized by law durina reasonable hours for the purpose of
600 inspectina. observina. takina measurement. samplina. testina or reviewina the records
601 of the wastewater collection system and arease control devices installed in a food
602 service establishment to ensure that such food service establishment is compliance
603 with this Division. Operational chanaes. maintenance and repairs reauired by the
604 Director shall be implemented as noted in the written notice received by the food
605 service establishment. The owner or occupant of such food service establishment. or
606 his or her desiqnee. shall be entitled to accompany the Director durina such inspection.
607 (f) Rl9cordkeepina. Food service establishments shall maintain records
608 meetina the followina reauirements:
14
II
II
609 (1) Food service establishments shall retain and make available for
610 inspection and copvinQ records of all c1eaninQ and maintenance for
611 the previous three (3) years for all Qrease control devices.
612 CleaninQ and maintenance records shall include. at a minimum. the
613 dates of cleaninQ/maintenance. the names and business addresses
614 of the company or person performinQ each cleaninQ/maintenance
615 and the volume of waste removed in each cleaninQ. Such records
616 shall be kept on site and shall be made available to the Director
617 upon reQuest.
618
619 (2) Food service establishments shall retain and make available for
620 inspection and copvinQ records of vellow Qrease disposal for the
621 previous three (3) years. Yellow Qrease disposalloQs shall include.
622 at a minimum. the dates of disposal. name and business address of
623 the company or person performinQ the disposal and the volume of
624 vellow arease removed in each c1eaninQ. Such records shall be
625 kept on site and shall be made available to the Director upon
626 reauest.
627
628 COMMENT
629
630 The section sets forth the following: (1) criteria for determining which FSEs are required to
631 have grease control devices; (2) installation requirements; (3) maintenance requirements; (4)
632 requirements for the disposal of waste from grease control devices; (5) inspection requirements;
633 and (6) recordkeeping requirements.
634
635
636 Sec. 28-79. Grease haulers.
637 (a) Anv person collectinQ, pumpinQ or haulinQ waste from Qrease control
638 devices within the City shall be certified under the ReQional Grease Hauler ProQram of
639 the Hampton Roads PlanninQ District Commission and shall be approved throuQh a
640 Hampton Roads Sanitation District Indirect Wastewater DischarQe Permit.
641 (b) Grease haulers shall notify the Director within twenty-four (24) hours of
642 any incident reQuired to be reported to the VirQinia Department of Environmental
643 Quality.
644 (c) Grease haulers shall retain and make available for inspection and copvina
645 bv the Director. for a period of at least three (3) years. all records related to Qrease
646 interceptor pumpinQ and waste disposal from businesses located in the City's
647 wastewater service area. The Director may reQuire additional record keepinQ and
648 reportinQ. as necessary. to ensure compliance with the terms of this Division.
1"5
649 COMMENT
650 The section sets forth the requirements applicable to grease haulers. These requirements
651 involve certification by Hampton Roads Planning District Commission and HRSD, notification to
652 the City of incidlents requiring reporting to the DEQ and maintenance of grease hauling records.
653 Sec. 28-80. Modification and repair.
654 (a) The Director may require existina food service establishments to modify or
655 repair any noncompliant arease control device and appurtenances within thirty (30)
656 calendar days of written notification by the Director. The Director may arant extensions
657 for aood caUSE! shown.
658 COMMENT
659 The section requires FSEs to repair noncompliant GCDs when required to do so by the
660 Director of Public Utilities.
661
662 Sec. 28-81. Violations and penalties.
663 (a) Any intentional or willful act or omission to act in violation of any of the
664 provisions of this Division shall be punishable by fine in an amount not to exceed One
665 . Thousand Dolli~1.000.00) per violation. Each day that a continuing violation exists
666 shall constitutE~ a separate offense. The court assessina such fines may. at its
667 discretion, ordm such fines to be paid into the treasury of the City for the purpose of
668 abatina, preventina or mitiaatina environmental pollution.
669 (b) Any person who. intentionally or otherwise, commits any of the acts
670 prohibited by this Division or who fails to perform any of the acts required by this
671 Division shall be liable to the City in an action at law for all costs of containment.
672 cleanup. abatement. removal and disposal of any substance unlawfully discharaed into
673 the wastewater collection system. as well as the costs of any damaaes or reaulatorv
674 fines imposed upon the City. that are proximately caused by such violations. Such
675 costs shall be collectible by the City in accordance with the provisions of Sections 28-29
676 and 28-30.
677 (c) In addition to any other remedy for the violation of this Division. the City
678 may brino leaal action to enioin the continuina violation of this Division. and the
679 existence of any other remedy. at law or in equity. shall be no defense to any such
680 action.
681 (d) The remedies set forth in this section are cumulative. not exclusive, and it
682 shall not be a defense to any action, civil or criminal. that one or more of the remedies
683 set forth herein has been souaht or aranted.
16
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
III
COMMENT
The section sets forth the criminal penalties and civil remedies for violations of the Division.
Intentional or willful violations are punishable by a fine not exceeding $1,000. In addition, violators
are liable to the City in an action at law for the costs of containment, cleanup, abatement, removal
and disposal of any substance unlawfully discharged into the wastewater collection system and are
subject to injunction by the City against continuing violations of the Division. The remedies are
cumulative in nature, such that the City may pursue any or all of them.
Sec. 28-82. Severabilitv.
The provisions of this Division shall be severable. it beinQ the intention of the City
Council that in the event one (1) or more of the provisions of this Division are adiudQed
to be invalid or unenforceable. the validity and enforceability of the remaininQ provisions
shall be unaffected bv such adiudication.
COMMENT
The standard severability language is set forth in this section. It provides that the entire
Division is not rendered invalid in the event one of its provisions is adjudged to be invalid or
unenforceable.
of
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on this
,2009.
day
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL
SUFFICIENCY: W.
(j)~ft( ~ '
City Attorney's Office
J)h/aJlfl!
Public Utilities
CA11038
February 17, 2009
R-3
17
, I
" I
ITEM: A Resolution Authorizing and Directing the City Manager to Execute, on Behalf of
the City, a Memorandum of Agreement Between the Hampton Roads Sanitation
District and the City of Virginia Beach Pertaining to Grease Control Devices
MEETING DATE: February 24, 2009
. Background: Virginia Beach wants to ensure that grandfathered Food Service
Establishments do not contribute fats, oils and grease (FOG) to the public sanitary
sewer system. FSEs established before the adoption of the Virginia Uniform Statewide
Building Code lacking grease control devices may be contributing FOG to the sanitary
sewer system. Hampton Roads Sanitation District (HRSD) has the authority to enforce
the retrofitting of grease control devices in food service establishments grandfathered
under the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code.
. Considerations: This agreement allows for HRSD to cooperate with the City of
Virginia Beach to ensure that such establishments install grease control devices.
. Public Information: This information was the subject of a Council Briefing on
December 2,2008. The Department of Public Utilities staff has participated in a series
of regional meetings with representatives from HRSD and the cities of Norfolk,
Chesapeake, Suffolk, Hampton, Newport News, Portsmouth, and James City. A FOG
website has been developed and placed on the City of Virginia Beach's Website to
disseminate information to the public.
. Alternatives: Authorize the Memorandum of Agreement or take no action.
. Recommendations: Approval of Memorandum of Agreement between HRSD
and the City of Virginia Beach.
. Attachments: Resolution and Summary of Material Terms
Recommended Action: Approve MOA
Submitting Department/Agency: Department of Public Utilities
City Manager: ~l> t, ~\\'P't.
tMa.V/Y) ~Jj
1 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE
2 CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE, ON BEHALF OF THE
3 CITY, A MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
4 HAMPTON ROADS SANITATION DISTRICT AND THE
5 CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH PERTAINING TO GREASE
6 CONTROL DEVICES
7
8
9 WHEREAS, the City of Virginia Beach has developed an ordinance implementing
10 affirmative measures to reduce the impact of discharges of fats, oils, and grease (FOG)
11 to the sanitary sewer collection system (the "FOG Ordinance"); and
12
13 WHEREAS, the FOG Ordinance requires, among other things, that food service
14 establishments must install grease control devices to the extent required by the Virginia
15 Uniform Statewide Building Code (USBC); and
16
17 WHEREAS, the USBe grandfathers food service establishments that were
18 constructed before the date the requirement for the installation of grease control devices
19 was first incorporated into the USBC; and
20
21 WHEREAS, within the City of Virginia Beach there are food service
22 establishments. that were constructed prior to the adoption of the USBC provision
23 requiring the installation of grease control devices in such establishments; and
24
25 WHEREAS, food service establishments lacking grease control devices may be
26 contributing FOG to the sanitary sewer system; and
27
28 WHEREAS, the Hampton Roads Sanitation District (HRSD) has the independent
29 legal authority to require existing food service establishments that are grandfathered
30 from the aforesaid USBC requirements to retrofit such establishments with grease
31 control devices; and
32
33 WHEREAS, subject to the approval of the City Council, the terms of a
34 Memorandum of Agreement between the City of Virginia Beach and HRSD have been
35 agreed upon, whereby HRSD has agreed to cooperate with the City in ensuring that
36 such establishments install proper grease control devices; and
37
38 WHEREAS, a Summary of Material Terms of such Memorandum of Agreement
39 is hereto attached and a copy is available for inspection at the Department of Public
40 Utilities;
41
42 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
43 OF VIRGINIA BEACH:e44
II
III
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
That the City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute the aforesaid
agreement on behalf of the City and to take such measures as are necessary or
advisable to implement such agreement according to its terms.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia on the
,2009.
day
of
Approved as to Content:
Approved as to Legal Sufficiency:
~~i:~~~
I.
City Attorney's Office
CA11047
R-1
February 16, 2009
2
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
HAMPTON ROADS SANITATION DISTRICT AND THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
SUMMARY OF MATERIAL TERMS
PARTIES: All Hampton Roads localities, incl. City of Virginia Beach, and HRSD
SUBJECT: Retrofitting of grease control devices in food service establishments (FSEs)
grandfathered under the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code
PURPOSE: Ensure that grandfathered FSEs do not contribute fats, oils and grease (FOG) to
the public sanitary sewer system
CITY OBLIGATIONS:
1, Determine whether FSES without grease control devices are contributing
FOG to the sanitary sewer system;
2, If City cannot achieve compliance by other means, request HRSD to
inspect FSE and take measures to cause compliance;
3, Issue required building permits and conduct future inspections;
4. Notify HRSD of future enforcement actions taken by City
HRSD OBLIGATIONS:
1. Perform inspection of FSE within reasonable time;
2. Take appropriate enforcement action;
OTHER:
Parties may withdraw from MOA at any time without further obligation
III
~~~
,(~I.". ~l}J
~<f'~ 1i' "..'\~)
E -, \"',
u . p:,
(.~ /;')
~ ..:..~. <: J
'-:'J",,1....; . fj
'l1,. ~#...~ "."~
l..(\:~~
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: A Resolution Appointing Mark D. Stiles to the Position of City Attorney and
Setting His Compensation
MEETING DATE: February 24,2009
. Background: Former City Attorney Leslie L. Lilley was recently appointed by
the General Assembly to the position of circuit court judge, thereby creating a vacancy
in the position of City Attorney. City Charter ~ 9.02 provides that City Council shall
appoint the City Attorney, and City Code ~ 2-89 provides that City Council shall
establish the City Attorney's compensation.
. Considerations: The attached resolution appoints Mark D. Stiles as City
Attorney and sets forth his annual compensation. The appointment will be effective on
March 1, 2009.
. Attachments: Resolution
Requested by City Council
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING MARK D.
STILES TO THE POSITION OF CITY
ATTORNEY AND SETTING HIS
COMPENSATION
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH,
VIRGINIA:
1. That pursuant to 9 9.02 of the City Charter, Mark D. Stiles is hereby
appointed to the position of City Attorney, effective March 1,2009.
2. That the salary of the City Attorney shall be $185,000.
3. That the City's contribution to the City Attorney's deferred compensation
plan shall be $10,000 annually.
4. That the car allowance of the City Attorney shall remain at $10,000
annually.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the
day of ,2009.
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL
SUFFICIENCY:
;e~~r-
City Attorney's Office
CA11051
February 18, 2009
R-2
II
III
,
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM:
An Ordinance to Adopt the Department of Housing and Neighborhood
Preservation's Housing Choice Voucher Administrative Plan and to
Authorize the City Manager to Submit a Copy of the Plan to the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development
MEETING DATE: February 24,2009
. Background: The Department of Housing and Neighborhood Preservation
("DHNP") has operated the federally-funded Housing Choice Voucher Program
("HCV Program"), formerly known as the Section 8 program, for many years. The
HCV Program is operated according to an administrative plan developed by
DHNP ("Plan") that details the various policies and procedures that are used to
operate the HCV Program.
. Considerations: DHNP is requesting that Council approve the Plan because 1)
the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development ("Huon) requires the
Plan to be authorized and adopted by City Council; and 2) DHNP has recently
completed an extensive review and modification of the Plan. In order to fulfill
HUD requirements and to ratify the revised Plan, DHNP is requesting that the
Plan be adopted by Council and that the City Manager be authorized to submit
the Plan to HUD. A summary of the Plan is attached hereto.
. Public Information: Public information will be made available through the
normal Council agenda process.
. Alternatives: While alternatives to the specific content of the Plan are possible,
the Plan contains the staff recommended options. Without an adopted Plan, the
HCV Program will be in violation of HUD requirements.
. Attachments: Ordinance, Summary of the Plan
~~ _.-
Recommended Action: Adoption . ; vi
Submitting DepartmentlAgency~ '. ~OUSing
Preservation ~ \1 ~'" .1'
Cily Manager: \J f-. '-1:5 ~
and Neighborhood
II
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 WHEREAS, the Department of Housing and Neighborhood Preservation
9 ("DHNP") has operated the federally-funded Housing Choice Voucher Program ("HCV
1 0 Program"), formerly known as the Section 8 program, for many years; and
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
AN ORDINANCE TO ADOPT THE DEPARTMENT OF
HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION'S
HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER ADMINISTRATIVE PLAN
AND TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT
THE PLAN TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING
AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the HCV Program is operated according to an administrative plan
developed by DHNP ("Plan") that details the various policies and procedures that are
used to operate the HCV Program; and
WHEREAS, DHNP is requesting that Council approve the Plan because 1) the
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD") requires the Plan to be
authorized and adopted by City Council; and 2) DHNP has recently completed an
extensive review and modification of the Plan; and
WHEREAS, in order to satisfy HUD requirements, and to ratify the revised Plan,
DHNP is requesting that the Plan be adopted by Council and that the City Manager be
authorized to submit the Plan to HUD; and
WHEREAS, an executive summary of the Plan is attached hereto, and a copy of
the full Plan is on file with the City Clerk.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH,
VIRGINIA:
DHNP's Plan for the administration of the Housing Choice Voucher Program is
hereby ratified and adopted by Council of the City of Virginia Beach, and the City
Manager is hereby authorized to submit a copy of the Plan to the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development.
of
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the
,2009.
day
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY:
l lL. ~ "i..-
City Attorney' Office
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
OVERVIJEW
The Department of Housing & Neighborhood Preservation consists of five distinct
divisions.
1. Administrative Services Division: The staff in this division handle all internal City
matters, including human resources, finance, contracts, compliance, information
technology, and office management.
2. Code Enforcement Division: This division handles all Code Enforcement activities,
including inspecting properties for housing violations, junk, overgrown grass, waste
management violations, inoperable vehicles, and the Certificate of Compliance rental
inspection program. In addition, through nuisance abatement activities, this division takes
action to eliminate violations including graffiti.
3. Strategy. Policy & Resource Development Division: This division coordinates
strategic lllnd program planning, resource development, grant acquisitions, policy
development, research, analysis, and media and communication functions and initiatives.
4. Housing Development Division: This division provides all services related to home
improvements including rehabilitation loans and grants of various types. In addition it is
developing the workforce housing program, and coordinating the provision of programs
and service:s to address homelessness. Additionally, the staff is responsible for receiving
and reviewing requests for the funding or approval of projects to maintain or expand
housing opportunities.
5. Rental Housing Division: This division provides the delivery of housing programs
including; Federal rental assistance through the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher
program, SI~curity Deposit, Optional Relocation and Housing Counseling programs.
The principal staff member of the Rental Housing Division is the Rental Housing
Administrator, who works for the city, and reports directly to the Department Director.
The Rental Housing Administrator is directly responsible for carrying out the policies
established by the Director, City Manager and City Council and is delegated the
responsibility for hiring, training and supervising the remainder of the division staff in
order to mimage the day-to-day operations, and to ensure compliance with federal and
state laws and directives for the programs managed.. In addition, the Rental Housing
Administra1tor's duties include budgeting and financial planning for the division.
II
I'
HCV PROGRAM AND ADMINISTRATIVE PLAN
The City of Virginia Beach Department of Housing & Neighborhood Preservation
(VBDHNP) operates the Housing Choice Voucher Program (HCV) within the Rental
Housing Division. The VBDHNP receives its funding for the HCV program from the
Department of Housing and Urban Development. The VBDHNP is not a federal
department or agency. The Department of Housing & Neighborhood Preservation is a
department within the City of Virginia Beach. The department operates housing
programs for low-income families. The VBDHNP enters into an Annual Contributions
Contract with HUD to administer the program requirements on behalf of HUD. The
VBDHNP must ensure compliance with federal laws, regulations and notices and must
establish policy and procedures to clarify federal requirements and to ensure consistency
in program operation.
Pursuant to 24 CFR 982.54 the VBDHNP must adopt a written administrative plan that
establishes local policies for administration of the (HCV) program in accordance with
HUD requirements. The administrative plan and any revisions of the plan must be
formally adopted by the City Counsel. The administrative plan states VBDHNP policy
on matters for which the VBDHNP has discretion to establish local policies. The plan
must be in accordance with HUD regulations and requirements.
CONTENTS OF THE PLAN
Federal regulations at 24CFR 982.54 further stipulate the VBDHNP administrative plan
must cover VBDHNP policies on the following subjects:
. Selection and admission of applicants from the DHNP waiting list, including any
DHNP admission preferences, procedures for removing applicant names from the
waiting list, and procedures for closing and reopening the DHNP waiting list (Chapter
4)
. Issuing or denying vouchers, including DHNP policy governing the voucher term and
any extensions or suspensions of the voucher term. 'Suspension' means stopping the
clock on the term of a family's voucher after the family submits a request for approval
of the tenancy. If the DHNP decides to allow extensions or suspensions of the
voucher term, the DHNP administrative plan must describe how the DHNP
determines whether to grant extensions or suspensions, and how the DHNP
determines the length of any extension or suspension (Chapter 8);
. Any special rules for use of available funds when HUD provides funding to the
DHNP for a special purpose (e.g., desegregation), including funding for specified
families or a specified category of families (Chapter Chapter 4);
. Occupancy policies, including definition of what group of persons may qualify as a
'family', definition of when a family is considered to be 'continuously assisted';
standards for denying admission or terminating assistance based on criminal activity
or alcohol abuse in accordance with 982.553 (Chapters 5 and 15);
. Encouraging participation by owners of suitable units located outside areas of low
income or minority concentration (Chapter 1);
. Assisbng a family that claims that illegal discrimination has prevented the family
from leasing a suitable unit (Chapter 2);
. Providing information about a family to prospective owners (Chapters 3 and 9);
. Disapproval of owners (Chapter 13);
. Subsidy standards (Chapter 5);
. Family absence from the dwelling unit (Chapter 12) ;
. How to determine who remains in the program if a family breaks up (Chapter 12);
. Informal review procedures for applicants (Chapter 18);
. Informal hearing procedures for participants (Chapter 18);
. The process for establishing and revising voucher payment standards (Chapter 8);
. The method of determining that rent to owner is a reasonable rent (initially and during
the tenn of a HAP contract) (Chapter 11);
. SpeciaJl policies concerning special housing types in the program (e.g., use of shared
housing) (Chapter 4);
. Policies concerning payment by a family to the DHNP of amounts the family owes
the DHNP (Chapter 17);
. Interim re-determinations of family income and composition (Chapter 12);
. Restrictions, if any, on the number of moves by a participant family (Chapter 13);
. Approval by the board of commissioners or other authorized officials to charge the
administrative fee reserve (Chapter 1);
. ProcedlLlfal guidelines and performance standards for conducting required housing
quality standards inspections (Chapter 10); and
. DHNP screening of applicants for family behavior or suitability for tenancy (Chapter
2)
II
" I
~~~.~.~
~~~ m
'\'. ,ft
~ ~"
~:Y
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM:
A Resolution Referring to the Planning Commission an Ordinance to
Amend the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas Ordinance by including
the Surface Area of Swimming Pools as Impervious Cover for Purposes of
Calculating Stormwater Management Requirements and by Establishing
Uniform Buffer Mitigation Standards for Consideration and
Recommendation
MEETING DATE: February 24, 2009
. Background: The ordinance referred to the Planning Commission by this
resolution involves the inclusion of the surface area of swimming pools as impervious
surfaces in calculating the stormwater management requirements of the Chesapeake
Bay Preservation Area Ordinance. The amendment also includes uniform buffer
mitigation standards for development in the Resource Protection Area.
. Considerations: This amendment will bring the Chesapeake Bay program into
compliance with state regulations and will provide citizens with the methodology to
determine the amount of buffer restoration that will be required for projects approved by
the Bay Board. The buffer mitigation standards are in draft form and will be distributed
and discussed with the relevant stakeholders prior to the Planning Commission voting
on a recommendation.
This resolution will refer the amendments to the Planning Commission for its
comments and recommendation.
. Attachments: Resolution, Ordinance
Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution
Submitting Department/Agency: Planning
City Manager~ 't ~~
'I
1 A RESOLUTION REFERRING TO THE
2 PLANNING COMMISSION AN ORDINANCE
3 TO AMEND THE CHESAPEAKE BAY
4 PRESERVATION AREA ORDINANCE BY
5 INCLUDING THE SURFACE AREA OF
6 SWIMMING POOLS AS IMPERVIOUS
7 COVER FOR PURPOSES OF CALCULATING
8 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
9 REQUIREMENTS AND BY ESTABLISHING
10 UNIFORM BUFFER MITIGATION
11 STANDARDS FOR CONSIDERATION AND
12 RECOMMENDATION
13
14 NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
15 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:
16
17 That the above-entitled ordinance, a copy of which is attached, is hereby referred
18 to the Planning Commission for its consideration and recommendation.
19
20 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, this
21 day of ,2009.
APPROV~D AS TO LEGAL SUFFICI~CY:
o ) ~ /11, /Vlwi .
City Attorney's Office
CA11048
R-1
February 16, 2009
1 .AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CHESAPEAKE BAY
2 PRESERVATION AREA ORDINANCE BY INCLUDING THE
3 SURFACE AREA OF SWIMMING POOLS AS IMPERVIOUS
4 GOVER FOR PURPOSES OF CALCULATING
5 STORMWA TER MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS AND BY
6 ESTABLISHING UNIFORM BUFFER MITIGATION
7 STANDARDS
8
9 Section Amended: Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area
10 Ordinance Section 106
11
12
13 WHEREAS, the City of Virginia Beach originally adopted the Chesapeake Bay
14 Preservation Area Ordinance (the "Ordinance") on November 6, 1990; and
15
16 WHEREAS, the City's Ordinance has been one of the most successful
17 Chesapeake Bay Ordinances in the State in accomplishing the goals of protecting and
18 enhancing water quality of the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries; and
19
20 WHEREAS, in developing and implementing its Ordinance, the City chose to
21 maximize wator quality protection by: (1) including highly erodible soils as components
22 of the Resource Protection Areas (RPA); notwithstanding the fact that the controlling
23 statutes and mgulations do not require the inclusion of highly erodible soils as an RPA
24 feature; (2) by declining to designate certain areas of the City as Intensely Developed
25 Areas (IDAs), in which development restrictions are substantially less stringent than in
26 RPAs; and (3) by designating all lands within the Chesapeake Bay Watershed not within
27 RPAs as Resource Management Areas (RMAs), thereby greatly expanding the land
28 area within the City that is subject to the Ordinance; and
29
30 WHEREAS, in September 2008, the Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Board
31 found the City's Ordinance to be in compliance with the Chesapeake Bay Preservation
32 Area Designation And Management Regulations, except with respect to regulations that
33 require that thE~ surface area of swimming pools be considered as impervious surfaces;
34 and
35
36 WHEREAS, swimming pools intercept rainfall falling into them, thereby capturing
37 such rainfall and preventing it from running off into adjacent waterways, and as a result
38 are different from other impervious surfaces such as driveways and rooftops, which do
39 not capture rainfall; and
40
41 WHEREAS, the City Council acknowledges that, under applicable state
42 regulations that are binding upon localities, swimming pools are impervious because
43 they "significantly impede or prevent the natural infiltration of water into the soil
44 underlying them," a process known as "groundwater recharge;" and
45
II
46 WHEREAS, the City Council fully appreciates the importance of groundwater
47 recharge to the natural environment, including the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries,
48 to-wit: groundwater recharge provides a sustainable water supply to trees and shrubs
49 located within Chesapeake Bay buffer areas, thereby helping to improve drought
50 tolerance and promote healthy plant growth; allows for soils to filter out excessive
51 nutrients, pesticides and other pollutants through chemical bonding to soil particles,
52 thereby reducing nutrient loads to adjoining waterways; and helps to intercept excessive
53 nutrients, pesticides and other pollutants in the soil before they reach the groundwater
54 table and begin to flow toward waterways; and
55
56 WHEREAS, it is the intention of the City Council that the City's Ordinance be fully
57 consistent with all applicable requirements of law; and
58
59 WHEREAS, the City Council reaffirms that it was not its intention in originally
60 adopting the Ordinance, and that it is not its intention in adopting this amendment to the
61 Ordinance, to preclude all reasonable development, including swimming pools, within
62 RPA buffers, but to fully protect water quality through appropriate and effective
63 mitigation measures; and
64
65 WHEREAS, it is the further intention of the City Council to establish uniform and
66 effective buffer restoration standards to be applied where RPA areas are developed
67 with impervious surfaces, inCluding swimming pools and other impervious structures, so
68 that such development does not cause or contribute to a degradation of water quality;
69
70 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
71 OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:
72 That Section 106 of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance (City
73 Code Appendix F) is hereby amended and reordained to read as follows:
74
75
76
77 Sec. 106. Performance standards.
78
79
80
81 (A) General performance standards for development and redevelopment.
82 Except as otherwise provided herein, the following standards shall apply to all
83 development and redevelopment in both Resource Protection Areas and Resource
84 Management Areas of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area:
85
86
87
2
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
(Q
(8) For any development or redevelopment, stormwater runoff shall be
controlled by the use of best management practices that achieve
the following results:
(d) Calculations involving the percentage of site area under
impervious cover shall be based upon the lot area landward
of mean low water and wetlands. Impervious cover shall Rat
include the water surface area of a swimming pool.
~~uffer restoration standards. The following standards shall applv in cases
III which buffer restoration is reQuired pursuant to the provisions of this
Ordinance as a result of development within a Resource Protection Area:
! 1) F or new impervious cover:
(a) Buffer restoration of an area eQual to two (2) times the
proposed impervious cover in the RP A shall be provided.
rounded to the nearest whole number. except that there shall
be no reQuirement for structures or additions to structures.
such as second stOry additions. that do not increase the
impervious footprint;
(b) No credit shall be given for proposed impervious area in
existing impervious areas that will be removed. Pool water
surface. decks. pavers and gravel driveways will be
considered impervious for this calculation:
(c) The composition of the buffer will be per Appendix D. Table
A of the Virginia Department of Conservation and
Recreation. Chesapeake Bav Local Assistance "Riparian
Buffers Modification & Mitigation Guidance Manual. 2003,
Reprinted 2006" (the Guidance Manual);
(d) In accordance with the Guidance Manual. in order for the
buffer to function as intended. it should contain the full
complement of vegetation that includes all trophic lavers:
shade trees. understory trees. shrubs. and ground cover.
whether the ground cover is veaetation, leaf litter, or mulch;
(e) Salt and flood tolerant plant species should be planted below
the 5-foot contour to ensure areater survival of the plantings;
3
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
II
(2)
II
(f) Canopy trees should not be planted within fifteen (15') of the
shoreline where there is a possibility of marsh shadina or
interference with the intearity of shoreline structures;
(a) Buffer restoration should be placed in the RPA, beainnina in
the 50-foot seaward portion of the buffer:
(h) Buffer restoration shall be placed in areas currently devoted
to tu rf:
(i) Where there is not sufficient area of existina turf to meet the
buffer restoration area reauirements. a site evaluation may
be necessary to determine the location and extent of
veaetative supplementation to meet the reauirement;
(j) All buffer trees. plants and aroundcover shall remain as
shown on the approved site plan. Any loss of such material
shall be replaced and thereafter maintained:
(k) Where specific site conditions warrant. veaetation
replacement rates as found in Appendix D of the Guidance
Manual may be employed with staff approval: and
(I) Deviations to the composition of the buffer as outlined in
these criteria shall be addressed on a case-by-case basis
and shall be subiect to a site evaluation to be undertaken by
the applicant or his or her consultant. However. in no case
shall deviations that compromise the auidance in subdivision
(C) (1) (d) above be considered.
For shoreline hardenina proiects and replacement of upland
retainina walls:
(a) Buffer restoration of an area fifteen feet (15') wide times the
lenath of the shoreline hardenina structure or upland
retainina wall shall be reauired. The buffer restoration
should be placed in the 50-foot seaward portion of the buffer
if practicable. but in any event within the Resource
Protection Area;
(b) If construction displaces buffer veaetation. all disturbed
areas shall be restored per the Guidance Manual. Appendix
D.
4
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on this _ day
of ,2009.
CA-10855
February 13, :W09
R-1
APPROVED AS TO LEG
/.j
( i l
City Attorney's Office
5
II
II
,
~
~
:$~I. ~.~'
(t: · .. ....\.,
~tl -- n~
,.........~.. .~
,\- /1
~...~
~....
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
""
~
ITEM: An Ordinance to Appropriate Funds from the Fund Balance of the Francis Land
House Trust Fund to the Museum Department's FY 2008-09 Operating Budget
MEETING DATE: February 24, 2009
. Background: In October 1999, the City of Virginia Beach Department of
Museums began operating the Adam Thoroughgood House. At that time, the Friends of
the Francis Land House extended their support to the Adam Thoroughgood House and
began to advertise that membership dues went to support both houses. The Friends of
the Francis Land House collected dues for memberships, general donations and
designated donations for both houses and deposited the funds to the Francis Land
House Trust Fund. This process continued until June 2006.
The Friends of the Adam Thoroughgood House were formed in January 2007. They
request that the Friends of the Francis Land House provide them with those monies
donated for the support of the Thoroughgood House including their share of general
donations and membership dues collected from October 1999 through June 2006. That
amount totals $9,825.97.
. Considerations: The Friends of the Francis Land House Executive Committee
has approved transferring funds in this amount to the Friends of the Adam
Thoroughgood House as full and final payment of the share of monies collected for
memberships and donations for the October 1999 through June 2006. The Francis
Land House Trust Fund currently has a balance of about $49,377.
. Public Information: Information will be disseminated through the normal
Council agenda process.
. Recommendations: Appropriate funds from the Francis Land House Trust
Fund for the purpose described above.
. Attachments: Ordinance
Recommended Action: Approval ~../1 4
Submitting Department/Agency: Museums f'1- Vff1L.-
City Manager:~ t~
1 AN ORDINANCE TO APPROPRIATE FUNDS FROM THE
2 FUND BALANCE OF THE FRANCIS LAND HOUSE TRUST
3 IFUND TO THE MUSEUM DEPARTMENT'S FY 2008-09
4 OPERATING BUDGET
5 THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA
6 BEACH, VIRGINIA:
7
8 That SB,826 is hereby appropriated from the fund balance of the Francis Land
9 House Trust Fund to the Museum Department's FY 2008-09 operating budget for the
10 purposes of dlividing donations and membership dues between the Francis Land House
11 and the Adam Thoroughgood House.
Requires an affirmative vote by a majority of all the members of City Council.
of
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia on the
2009.
day
Approved as tl) C~ntent:
Approved as to Legal Sufficiency:
-8~CL ~
Management Services
/~~
City A~y'S Offi<:e ---
CA11042
R-2
February 12, 2009
II
II
,"lA.~
~rJ~~-~'
._ J.
~Lb
~
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: An Ordinance to Accept and Appropriate Funds from the Department of
Homeland Security through the Virginia Department of Emergency Management
to the Police Department
MEETING DATE: February 24, 2009
. Background: The Department of Homeland Security through the Virginia
Department of Emergency Management has awarded the Virginia Beach Police
Department funding through the 2008 Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI). This grant
will be active from 8/1/2008 through 8/31/2011. The grant provides $416,754 of federal
funding and has no match requirement.
. Considerations: This funding will be used to purchase equipment needed by
the Police Department that was not funded through the annual budget process.
Specifically, the funding will provide equipment to be used by the Bomb Unit to enhance
response capabilities and to detect and disrupt acts of terrorism.
The City is not required to provide a match for this grant.
. Public Information: Public information will be provided through the normal
Council Agenda process.
. Recommendations: It is recommended that Council accept and appropriate the
grant award.
. Attachments: Ordinance
Recommended Action: Approval of Ordinance
Submitting Department/Agency: Police Department .! H In .4-mr
City Manager:~ 't. I~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
AN ORDINANCE TO ACCEPT AND APPROPRIATE
FUNDS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY THROUGH THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT
OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT TO THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT
WHEREAS, The Department of Homeland Security through the Virginia
Department of Emergency has authorized a 2009 Urban Area Security Initiative grant of
$416,754 to the City of Virginia Beach.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:
That $416,754 is hereby accepted from the Department of Homeland Security
through the Virginia Department of Emergency and appropriated to the Police
Department's FY 2008-09 Operating Budget.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia on the
.' 2009.
day
of
Requires an affirmative vote by a majority of all the members of City Council.
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL
SUFFICIENCY:
u~.c..
Management Services
Vd~;-
CA11041
R-2
February 9, 20109
'I
~i;"~
f,l":il" .... ....~>I'.ib
r~ "41" "'''~)
l.f!'~:-"\"',
~e: ' ," l~~
.. i....,."" :."
,,,,~:;,-'';'', ' ilj
"~~~".~'.:j;
"";'::"~oJJ
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: An Ordinance to Transfer Funds to the Multimedia Services FY 2008-09
Operating Budget
MEETING DATE: February 24,2009
. Background: The Department of Communications and Information Technology
(ComIT) currently utilizes a Content Management System (CMS) to serve as the
backbone for disseminating information via official city Websites. These websites are
VBgov.com, virginiaaquarium.com, and yesvirginiabeach.com. The existing website
application does not meet all requested contributing agency/department or website
visitor needs. The upgrade will bring needed capability to these websites.
. Considerations: The software upgrade and modules will add improvements
and functionality. The improvements will include: Web 2.0 Tools - blogs, polls, RSS,
ratings, and tagging; performance enhancements - quicker website launch times,
personalized user experiences, and caching of content; developer tools reducing
programming (code) requirements; web based content editing improving contributor
experience (for departmental page masters); and improved work flow for entering and
gaining approval of content.
The software will be purchased from and configured by the current vendor, which
ensures integration into the CMS and new software applications.
Given the current economic conditions, the vendor is willing to reduce costs for the suite
of software applications. The reduction is significantly below market value. The original
base system software purchase (in 2002) cost over $260,000. The total cost for the
software upgrade purchase (seven new applications) and prorated maintenance is
$163,125, of which $34,475 is available, and $128,650 in additional funding is needed.
. Public Information: Information will be disseminated through the regular
Council agenda notification process.
. Alternatives: An alternative is to continue operating the existing application.
This would result in significant new Web developmental functionality delays, lengthy site
visitation loading times, and the inability to deploy needed web tools.
. Recommendations: The recommendation is to approve transfer of funds to the
Multimedia Services FY 2008-09 Operating Budget.
. Attachments: Ordinance
Recommended Action: Approval
Submitting DepartmentlAgen~Communications and Information Technology % f:t
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
AN ORDINANCE TO TRANSFER FUNDS TO THE
MULTIMEDIA SERVICES FY 2008-09 OPERATING
BUDGET
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH,
VIRGINIA:
That $128,650 is transferred to the Multimedia Services FY 2008-09 Operating
Budget to fund the Website Content Management Systems software upgrade in the
following manner:
(1) $30,000 from the FY 2008-09 Operating Budget of the Department of Parks
and Recreation;
(2) $20,OQO from the FY 2008-09 Operating Budget of the Department of Public
Utilities;
(3) $1S,000 from FY 2008-09 Operating Budget of the Department of Public
Works;
(4) $7,500 from the FY 2008-09 Operating Budget of the Department of
Plannin~l;
(5) $7,500 from the FY 2008-09 Operating Budget of the Department of Public
Libraries.;
(6) $10,000 from the FY 2008-09 Operating Budget of the City Manager's
Office; and
(7) $38,650 from the FY 2008-09 Operating Budget of the Department of
Communications and Information Technology.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the
,2009.
day
of
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL
SUFFICIENCY:
M~~~~I~
<1/ ~~d1nc-
City A r ey's ice
CA11039
R-3
February 13, 2009
II
II
K. PLANNING
1. Application of ASSOCIATION FOR RESEARCH & ENLIGHTENMENT, INC.
(A.R.E.), for an Expansion ofa Nonconforming Use at 215 67th Street DISTRICT 5-
L YNNHA VEN
APPLICANT REQUESTS
DEFERRAL TO MARCH 10,2009
2. Variance to ~4.4(b) ofthe Subdivision Ordinance that requires all newly created lots meet the
requirements ofthe City Zoning Ordinance (CZO) for CHARLES H. DAWSON re lot width
at 4300 Charity Neck Road - DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE
RECOMMENDATION
APPROVAL
3. Variance to S4.4(b) of the Subdivision Ordinance that requires all newly created lots meet the
requirements ofthe City Zoning Ordinance (CZO) for BRUCE & KELLIE HENLEY re a
flag lot at Charity Neck and North Muddy Creek Roads - DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE
RECOMMENDATION
APPROVAL
4. Applications of JOHN RODGER BURNS at 3477 Muddy Creek Road - DISTRICT 7 -
PRINCESS ANNE
a. Variance to ~4.4(b) ofthe Subdivision Ordinance that requires all newly created lots meet
the requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance (CZO) re constructing a dwelling in the
floodplain
b. Floodplain Variance re construction fill and mitigation
RECOMMENDATION
APPROVAL
5. Application of STEPHEN C. SWAIN for an Expansion of a Nonconforming Use re
additions to a two-story single family dwelling at 1107 Cedar Point Drive - DISTRICT 5 -
LYNNHAVEN
RECOMMENDATION
APPROVAL
6. Application of W AL-MART REAL EST ATE BUSINESS TRUST for a Modification of
Conditions Nos. 4. 6. and 10 to reduce parking spaces, enlarge and modernize the building,
and, to provide more green space, (approved by City Council on May 14, 1990) at 657
Phoenix Drive - DISTRICT 3 - ROSE HALL
RECOMMENDATION
APPROVAL
7. Application ofRE-BIRTH INTERNATIONAL MINISTRIES for a Conditional Use
Permit re a church at 5249 Challedon Drive - DISTRICT 2 - KEMPSVILLE
RECOMMENDATION
APPROVAL
8. Application of CRESCENT COMMUNITY CENTER for a Conditional Use Permit re a
church at 1401 Lynnhaven Parkway, Unit 101 - DISTRICT 3 - ROSE HALL
RECOMMENDATION
APPROVAL
9. Application of CARLA L. GRAHAM for a Conditional Use Permit re a Cosmetology
School at 5760 Princess Anne Road - DISTRICT 2 - KEMPSVILLE
RECOMMENDATION
APPROVAL
10. Application of RICHMOND 20MHZ, L.L.C. d/b/a N TELOS for a Conditional Use
Pennit re a communication tower at 345 North Great Neck Road - DISTRICT 6 - BEACH
RECOMMENDATION
APPROVAL
11. Appilication of A TTOM DONUTS, INC. for a Conditional Use Permit re a drive-through
window for an eating and drinking establishment at 501 Laskin Road - DISTRICT 6-
BEACH
STAFF RECOMMENDA nON
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDA nON
DENIAL
APPROVAL
12. Application of BURGER KING CORPORATION for a Conditional Use Permit re a drive-
through window for an eating and drinking establishment at 524 Laskin Road - DISTRICT 6
-BEACH
STAFF RECOMMENDA nON
PLAJ'mING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
DENIAL
APPROVAL
13. Application ofMETROTEC ASSOCIATES, INC. and ARVIND GOWDA for a Change
of Zoning District Classification. from R-l0 Residential District to Conditional A-12
Apartment District on Shumey Lane - DISTRICT 4 - BA YSIDE
RECOMMENDATION
APPROVAL
14. Application ofPRINCESSBORO COMPANY, INC. for a Change of Zoning District
Classification from AG-l Agricultural District to Conditional 0-2 Office and Conditional
B-2 Community Business District re office and retail space at Princess Anne and
Sandbridge Roads - DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE
DEFERRED BY CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION
JANUARY 27,2009
APPROVAL
15. REQUEST TO WITHDRAW AN APPLICATION of WELDEN FIELD OF VIRGINIA,
L.L.C. for a Change of Zoning District Classification from 1-1 Light Industrial District, R-
5D Residential Duplex District and 0-2 Office District to Conditional R-7.5 Residential
District with a PD-H2 Overlay at Regent University Drive and Jake Sears Road - DISTRICT
1 - CENTERVILLE
RECOMMENDATION
ALLOW WITHDRAWAL
"
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
\jirgi/1/3 lJeach City Council v,ill meet in the Chamber .It City Hall, Municipal Center,
:>101 Courthouse Drive. Tuesday, February 24, 2009, at 6:00 p.m. Tht.
!nllowing applications will be IleaI'd:
L YNNHAVEN DISTRICT
Stephen C. Swain Application: Expansion of a NonconformirJ1L1!1?g at 1107 Cedar
POint Drive (GPIN 2418662628).
Association for Research & Enlightenment, Inc. (A.R.E.) Application: E~p.<ill.sion .9..L<:!
\1911confonnine: Use at 215 67th Street (GPINs 241q646299: 2419644281;
2419645012).
KEMPSVILLE DISTRICT
He-Birth International Ministries Application: Conditional Use Permit for a church at
S249 ChaJledon Drive. !\ICUZ is Less than 65.
Carla L. Graham Application: ~onrlitional Use Permit (cosmetology school) at 5760
Princess Anne Road. ,\ICUZ is Less than 65.
ROSE HALL DISTRICT
Well-Mart Real Estate Business Trust Application: Modification of Conditions
:lpproved by City Council on May 14, 1990) at 657 Phoenix Drive. AICUZ is Greater
t11iJn 75 and APZ-2.
C,'escent Community Center Application: conditional Use Permit for a church at 1401
Lynnhaven Parkway. Unit 101. AICUZ is 65-"70.
PRINCESS ANNE DISTRICT
Charles H. Dawson, Subdiviston Velrian~ 4300 Charity Neck Road. AICUZ is Less
than 65.
I)PJce & Kellie Henley AppliCation: ~ub_divi~ion Variance at Chanty Neck dnd Nort~,
,'-ruddy Creek Roads (GPIN 2412767181), AICUZ is Less than 65.
John Rodger Burns Application: .subdiVision Variance and Floodplain Vwiance a
3477 Muddy Creek Road. !\JCUZ is Less than 65.
BEACH DISTRICT
l~ichmond 20mhz. L.L.C. Dj B/ A nTelos .'\pplication: Conditional Use Permit for a
,;ornmunication tower at 345 North Great ~Jf'ck Road. AICUZ is Greater than is ilnc
;\PZ-2.
;\ttOI11 Donuts, Inc. Application: ~pnditional Use Permit for an eating and drinking
,;stablishment with a drive-through window at 501 Laskin Road. AICUZ IS 70-75. This
,~em will be heard by Plannin/?, Commission on February 11. 2009.
Burger King Corporation ;\pplication: Conditional1!?e Permit (drive-through faciiltles,
at 524 Laskin Road. MCUZ is 70-75. This item will be heard by Planning Commission
.J" February 11, 2009.
BA YSIDE DISTRICT
Metrolec ,\ssociates. Inc. /"nd Arvind Gowda Application: Cl~.9rge 1)1 Z9Dl~gJ)!J;tricj
rlp5SiflCf?jlon from R-tO Residential District to ConditloNll A-12 Apartment District at
:)nur'1~y Ldne IGPIN 1468444310). T/';e Compmhensive Plim: Pnma,y R'~sldentjaJ
\n'i:l. Purpose: develop townhouses. ilJCUZ IS Less theln 65.
CENTERVlllE DISTRICT
'Ar't1fmfip!d Of Virginia. L.L.C. /\pplication: .Br'-,-Q1Le..$1193!!:-rl'::iY'_:..o..~PJ)l!~;'ltI0J1-L9Lil
':jl..tl!"l!e of Zonl_lllL-Distflct Clil5Slfi~atlon froill 1-1 Ught Ir,justnal uistrlGt, H-'jD
i/t:'3!cJ.:nt/al Duplex Distnct ,;nd 0-2 oJffice Di~trict to Condlt'ondl R-7 ,~) RA~,id'~ntial
:)'c;l,':t 'Alth a PD-H2 0'ver!JY at Regent Unl'.Jer3lty Drive d'j,j J,ll<.e S"<1r" R')ijlj (GPI~js
l'I:~::i5T1149: pal1 of 1455iiGG.W8).
,\11 1I'lerested citizens :Ire inv!tpd to attend.
!'{'Jth Hodges Ffi1:,'~r, :.IMC
e;1', Clerk
II
I'
~~
';;4'~'" "':;+~b
~t~. . .l\\
\J.......L
~~.~Lf/
~~~~
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: ASSOCIATION FOR RESEARCH AND ENLIGHTENMENT (A.R.E.),
Expansion of a Nonconformina Use, 215 67th Street. L YNNHAVEN
DISTRICT.
MEETING DATE: February 24,2009
. Background:
The applicant requests alterations to a nonconforming use, the Association for
Research and Enlightenment. The Association was founded around 1928 in the
present location of 67th Street, Atlantic Avenue, 68th Street, and Holly Road. A
conditional use permit was approved to enlarge an existing non-profit private
institution on July 10, 1961. A conditional use permit was approved for a non-
profit institution library and related facilities building and parking area on
September 10, 1973. Another conditional use permit was approved to expand a
non-profit institution (health services and office) on October 17, 1983. With the
adoption of the City Zoning Ordinance in April 1988 conditional non-profit uses
were deleted from the residential districts. Thus the site is now nonconforming
and requires approval from City Council for alterations.
. Considerations:
The applicant requests a deferral of this item to City Council's March 10, 2009
meeting to provide the applicant time to revise the plans in response to
comments from City staff and the community.
. Recommendations:
Allow deferral to City Council's March 10 meeting.
Recommended Action: Deferral to March 10.
Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Deparbnent ^ ~ \
City Manager~\ k . ~ll<>'l. I V' 'l
A.R.E.
Map 1.-3
M" Not to Sc"le
p-,
~
~
Z
0-\
?>
~ p-,
j
FIRST IANfJlNG
-">7 ATE fJARK
\
'T.
Non-Conforming Use
Relevant Information:
· Lynnhaven District
· The ,applicant requests alterations to a nonconforming use, the
Association for Research and Enlightenment.
· AIClJZ is 65 - 70.
Recomm4~ndation :
· Deferral to March 10
II
II
CHARLES H. DAWSON
o
Charles H. Dawson
AG -02
Map L-18
Map Not to Sc"le
~
&:
005
G-l
o GAG - 2
o cO
-2
Subdivision Variance
Relevant Information:
· Princess Anne District
. The subject parcel was created by a two (2) -lot subdivision plat in
1964 with the original subdivision by deed for this site in November
1953.
· Future plans are for the property owner to relocate the existing
dwelling to the rear of the property and then add on to the structure.
That plan was submitted to the DSC and it was there that it was
discovered that this lot was created illegally by deed some years
ago.
· In sum, this variance will allow this lot to be legally recorded. A
variance is needed, as the lot frontage is 147 feet (ordinance requires
150 feet).
Evaluation and Recommendation:
· Planning Staff recommended approval
· Planning Commission recommends approval (10-0).
· Consent Agenda.
· No opposition.
I " ,II
II
I'
~~""
~':'~~~oO-, .....,.Z~b
fl- ,,' '\)
~':\':'"""" J:}
i.'~~ ~.,;'l..
~"'''' ......"1
"~~y
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: CHARLES H. DAWSON, Subdivision Variance (lot width and area), 4300
Charity Neck Road. PRINCESS ANNE DISTRICT.
MEETING DATE: February 24,2009
. Background:
The property owner desires to relocate the existing dwelling on the parcel to the
rear of the property and then add on to the structure. A plan was submitted to the
Planning Department for that purpose, and it was discovered that this lot was
created illegally by deed some years ago. The subject parcel was created as part
of a two-lot subdivision in 1964, with the original subdivision by deed for this site
in November 1953. The Princess Anne County Subdivision Ordinance was
adopted September 28, 1953, two (2) months prior to the recording of the deed.
Thus, even though there is a home on the property built in the 1940s, the lot is
not considered legally recorded and a Subdivision Variance is necessary prior to
any relocation of existing structures or new construction.
. Considerations:
The parcel is one acre in size and has only 147.27 feet of frontage along Charity
Neck Road. The Zoning Ordinance requires 150 feet of lot width. In addition,
after the required dedication along Princess Anne Road, the parcel will fall under
one (1) acre to 42,922 square feet. A variance, therefore, to lot width and area
are necessary.
Staff's evaluation of this request reveals the proposal, through the submitted
materials. does provide evidence of a hardship justifying the granting of a
variance to the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. The hardship
involved does not appear to be general or recurring in nature. The 1953 Princess
Anne County Zoning Ordinance indicated two types of lots in the Agricultural
zoned areas. The A-U Agricultural Unrestricted requirements possessed no
minimum lot size or width and the A-R Agricultural Restricted requirements
possessed a minimum area of 10,000 square feet and a minimum width of 100
feet. During that time. lots of the size of the subject parcel were not considered
unusual, and a few neighboring homes in the area are situated on lots close in
size and configuration to the applicant's.
The Planning Commission placed this item on the consent agenda because
though the lot was not legally created, it is consistent in size with other lots in the
Charles H. Dawson
Page 2 of 2
area croated during the same time period, the commission concluded a hardship
existed, and there was no opposition to the request.
. Recommendations:
The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 9-0 to approve
this request with the following conditions:
1. The property shall be substantially as shown on the plat entitled "Subdivision
of Pmperty of James B. Dawson et ai," dated 15 September 2008, prepared
by Bonifant Land Surveys which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City
Council and is on file in the Department of Planning.
2. In the event of demolition of the existing dwelling and replacement with a new
structure or the relocation of the existing dwelling to another portion of the site
or any other land disturbing activities proposed on this site, not including
landscaping with the exception of fill material, a site plan of any proposed
improvements and/or renovations to the property shall be submitted to the
Devl310pment Services Center (DSC) of the Planning Department for review.
No building permits shall be issued until said plan has been approved by the
DSC.
. Attachments:
Staff Review
Disclosure Statement
Plannin~1 Commission Minutes
Location Map
Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends
approval.
Submitting Del)artmentlAgency: Planning Department
City Manager: ~ It.. ~/Y>7i.
II
I'
G-1
CHARLES H.
DAWSON
Agenda Item 5
January 14, 2009 Public Hearing
Map 1-18
Mep Not. 'to Seele
Charles H. Dawson
AG~2
005
G-1
STAFF PLANNER:
Carolyn A. K. Smith
Subdivision Variance
REQUEST:
Subdivision Variance to Section 4.4(b) of the Subdivision Ordinance that requires all newly created lots meet
all the requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance. Variances to lot width and area are requested.
ADDRESS I DESCRIPTION: 4300 Charity Neck Road
GPIN:
2410598630
ELECTION DISTRICT:
PRINCESS ANNE
SITE SIZE:
43,658 square feet
AICUZ:
Less than 65 dB DNL
Existing Lot: The existing lot is just over one (1) acre and
apparently was created by deed in 1953 and was conveyed by
deed again in 1964. There is a dwelling on the property that was constructed in 1940. The property has
only 147.27 feet of frontage along Charity Neck Road. The Zoning Ordinance requires 150 feet of lot
width, In addition, after the required dedication along the road, the parcel will fall under one (1) acre to
42,922 square feet.
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
Proposed Lots: It is the intent of the applicant to legally recognize the existing parcel that was originally
platted by deed.
1tmn Parcel A
Lot Width in feet 150 147*
Lot Area in square feet 43,560 42,922*
*Variance required
CHARLES H. DAWSON
Agenda Item 5
Page 1
LAND USE AND ZONING INFORMATION
EXISTING Lj~ND USE: single-family dwelling
SURROUNDING LAND
USE AND ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
West:
. Single-family dwelling I AG-2 Agricultural District
. Single-family dwelling I AG-2 Agricultural District
· Single-family dwelling, marsh I AG-2 Agricultural District
. Charity Neck Road, single-family dwellings / AG-2 Agricultural
District
NATURAL RESOURCE AND
CULTURAL FEATURES:
This property is located in the Southern Watersheds Management Area.
The residence, detached garage, and driveway are all located out of any
environmentally sensitive area. Any new development on the property
would be required to meet the regulations of the Floodplain Ordinance
and have a finished floor elevation of at least one foot above the base
flood elevation (BFE) of five feet (NA VD 1929). The City, in conjunction
with FEMA, is in the process of updating the floodplain maps and the
BFE is this area will be revised to four feet (NA VD 1988). All ground
elevations depicted on the submitted site plan, with the exception of one,
are all above the five foot contour.
IMPACT ON CITY SERVICES
MASTER 1rRANSPORTATION PLAN (MTP) I CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP): Charity
Neck Roac:l is considered a two-lane undivided local street. No CIPs are slated for this area.
TRAFFIC: Street Name Present Present Capacity Generated Traffic
Volume
Charity Neck No Data No Data Available Existing Land Use:.! - 10
Road Available ADT1
Proposed Land Use 3 -
10 ADT1
Average Dally Tnps
2 as defined by one single-family dwelling
3 as defined by one single-family dwelling
WATER & SE~ There is no City water or sewer service to this property. Health Department approval for
wells and sep1tic is required.
CHARLES H. DAWSON
Agenda Item 5
Page 2
II
II
Section 9.3 of the Subdivision Ordinance states:
No variance shall be authorized by the Council unless it finds that:
A. Strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship.
B. The authorization of the variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property,
and the character of the neighborhood will not be adversely affected.
C. The problem involved is not of so general or recurring a nature as to make reasonably
practicable the formulation of general regulations to be adopted as an amendment to the
ordinance.
D. The hardship is created by the physical character of the property, including dimensions
and topography, or by other extraordinary situation or condition of such property, or by
the use or development of property immediately adjacent thereto. Personal or self-
inflicted hardship shall not be considered as grounds for the issuance of a variance.
E. The hardship is created by the requirements of the zoning district in which the property is
located at the time the variance is authorized whenever such variance pertains to
provisions of the Zoning Ordinance incorporated by reference in this ordinance.
EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of this request.
Evaluation:
Future plans are for the property owner to relocate the existing dwelling to the rear of the property and
then add on to the structure. That plan was submitted to the DSC and it was there that it was discovered
that this lot was created illegally by deed some years ago. The subject parcel was created by a two (2) -
lot subdivision plat in 1964 with the original subdivision by deed for this site in November 1953. The Plat
was part of a Deed of Bargain and Sale recorded on November 29, 1953, in Deed Book 346, Page 62.
The Princess Anne County Subdivision Ordinance was adopted September 28, 1953, two (2) months
prior to the recording of the deed. Thus, even though there is a home on the property built in the 1940s,
the lot is not considered legally recorded and a Subdivision Variance is necessary.
Staff's evaluation of this request reveals the proposal, through the submitted materials, does provide
evidence of a hardship justifying the granting of a variance to the requirements of the Subdivision
Ordinance. The hardship involved does not appear to be general or recurring in nature. In addition, the
Princess Anne County Zoning Ordinance indicated two types of lots in the Agricultural zoned areas. The
A-U Agricultural Unrestricted requirements possessed no minimum lot size or width and the A-R
Agricultural Restricted requirements possessed a minimum area of 10,000 square feet and a minimum
width of 100 feet. During that time, lots of this size were not considered unusual and a few neighboring
homes in the area are situated on lots close in size and configuration to the applicant's. Moreover, at one
time, the lot was one acre in size; however, due to requirements by the City of Virginia Beach for roadway
dedications, the size of the lot has decreased below one acre. Staff, therefore, recommends approval of
this request subject to the conditions below.
CHARLES H. DAWSON
Agenda Item 5
Page 3
CONDITIONS
1. The property shall be substantially as shown on the plat entitled "Subdivision of Property of James B.
Dawson et ai," dated 15 September 2008, prepared by Bonifant Land Surveys which has been
exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file in the Department of Planning.
2. In th4~ event of demolition of the existing dwelling and replacement with a new structure or the
relocation of the existing dwelling to another portion of the site or any other land disturbing activities
proposed on this site, not including landscaping with the exception of fill material, a site plan of any
proposed improvements and/or renovations to the property shall be submitted to the Development
Servilces Center (DSC) of the Planning Department for review. No building permits shall be issued until
said plan has been approved by the DSC.
NOTE: Furtli,er conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances.
Plans submmed with this rezoning application may require revision during detailed site plan review to
meet all applicable City Codes and Standards.
CHARLES H. DAWSON
Agenda Item 5
Page 4
II
II
AERIAL OF SITE LOCATION
CHARLES H. DAWSON
Agenda Item 5
Page 5
Charles H. Dawson
Par< pI SA
,jol # 2002080 1 ~'O 1:1407
2410690831
'N J 419 680:l49
IE '221~937580
Charles H Dawson
Parcel 5"\
dOL # 20)208013010407
2410690831
1 c! IHt~II'IOilli R:v\/ ch..'(111.. ;.:ttll,n
r.1B '75 P Sf
S 07 27'47" (
132 89'
ru
3
~
.::,
Q
en
o
ro)
~
0'
("")
C
""
---
(V-i
~-
(!;
<
Robert E Braswell
DH 1582 P 5~
24 ~ (\ :'8 9428
"-
~
..c,
......
C(
v)
If; 'nqrf.:'~~... Fqrt.~') Ea':i(~n'ftr
Lib 840 P 480
"-:- T - -
,
o
o
U'l
":t
-
?
-'
C
'::J
l.'l
~.
C;
m
0,
1'.
co
:.J)
I.lI
in
~
U'l
":t
.:0
.:0
CI)
PARCEL A
42 Cj2? ~,
!ll
(;
~
o
C;
Q
U'l
N 03 3555' W
~ DC
Fredrick T Marsh
D8 407~ P 951
241(\ 59 7468
5' hp'etly d{~ll'caled 10 Ilk
City ,)1 Vuglflld Bf'al t1 V"
~ 7:.I!-,f
U'l
14:' 27
10 I 11(j1 e~~ Ey' e<."
E d'Spflipn'
c)b 8')8 p 4YJ
'N 3 4U9 687 007 '
,E 12 ;'15 628652 '
, N CT355,'S" W 14" 1)0
CHARITY NECK RD 140' R'W)
: I~~: No /1)1)70801,1)101(17 DH '\.1" I; hi'
3209 17' to disk 147
-
II Nanneys Creek Rd
SUBDIVISION OF PROPERTY
OF JAMES B. DAWSON, ET AL
/IIs1 No 200BO(j200()(J~,3e ',.
VIRGINIA BEACH. VIRGINIA
PROPOSED SUBDIVISION
CHARLES H. DAWSON
Agenda Item 5
Page 6
II
II
Map L-18
Mop Not to Scola
Charles H. Dawson
AG~2
005
N
~
Q
&:
o
[J
CI
999
o GAG - 2
o 8
o
o 999
9[!] 0 0
Subdivision Variance
No Zoning History to Report
ZONING HISTORY
CHARLES H. DAWSON
Agenda Item 5
Page 7
z
o
.. ~
~
U'
. I
~
~
~
~l
U,
~1
~i
I
Z:
O 2 Ust all businesses that have a parent-subsidiary 1 or affiliated business entitY<
I relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary)
i I :
c.I':) .
D t
>- ------
~ 4 i 0( Check here If the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm.
Q \ business, or other unincorporated organization.
~ ; 1 8. 2 See next page for footnotes
p1
CI)
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
~
APPLICANT DISCLOSURE
If the applicant IS a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated
organization, complete the following:
1. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees,
partners. etc below: (Attaclllist if necessary)
2 List all bUSinesses that have a parent-subsidiary 1 or affiliated bUSiness entity2
relationship with the applicant (Attach list if necessary)
Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, bUSiness. or
other unincorporated organization.
PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE
Complete this section onty if property owner is different from applicant
!f the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business. or other
unincorporated organization, complete the following:
1 Ust the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members,
trustees. partners. etc. below: (Attach list if necessary)
SUbdiVISion Variance Application
Page lOot 11
ReVIsed 7/11/06
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
CHARLES H. DAWSON
Agenda Item 5
Page 8
II
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES
List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect
to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural
services, real estate services, financial services, accounting services, and legal
services: (Attach list if necessary)
\ "Parent-subsidiary relationship" means "a relationship that exists when one
corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting
power of another corporation" See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act Va
Code 3 2.2-3101,
2 "Affiliated business entity relationship" means "a relationshi p, other than parent-
subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a controlling ownership
interest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in one entity is also a controlling
owner in the other entity, or (iii) there is shared management or control between the business
entities, Factors that should be considered in determining the existence of an affiliated
business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person
own or manage the two entities; there are common or commingled funds or assets; the
business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities,
resources or personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship
between the entities," See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code S
22-3101
CERTIFICA TION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate
I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for
public hearing. I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at
least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing according to the instructions in this package The
undersigned also consents to entry upon the subject property by employees of the Department of
Planning to photograph and view the site for purposes of processing and evaluating this application
I
, -r;1,; A~> ;; - :/"'~b'/'~'---
Applicants Signature
..' Lt;~,~ .~7(
-i. ~ _......._
.~ . j.-' ", ~
Print Name
-"'r~..,. !,,,,,, -r ',,;~_~. __~
.-- _1.'~.".l\..."'I,u:;-- \ I f' 'F r-_/'F" \
Property Owners Signature (if different than applicant)
;:5ANP~14 r ])AW6~N
Print Name
SUbdIVISIon Variance Aoolication
Page 11 of 11
RevIsed 7111/06
II
z
o
.. I
~
u
I" ,f
I~
I~
'~
~
U
~
~
Z
o
I t
CI':J
>
I t
Q
~
~.
CId'
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
CHARLES H. DAWSON
Agenda Item 5
Page 9
Item #5
Charles H. Dawson
Subdivision Variance
4300 Charity Neck Road
District 7
Princess Anne
January 14,2009
CONSENT
Joseph Strange: The next matter is agenda item 5. An application of Charles H. Dawson for
a Subdivision Variance, Subdivision of Charles H. Dawson on property located at 4300
Charity Neck Road, District 7, Princess Anne with two conditions.
Phil Bonifont: Good afternoon. My name is Phil Bonifont. I'm a land surveyor. I'm
representing Mr. Dawson on this project.
Joseph Strange: Are the conditions acceptable?
Phil Bonifont: Yes they are.
Joseph Strange: Thank you very much.
( Phil Bonifont: Thank you.
Joseph Strange: ][s then: any upposition to tillS matter being placed 011 the consent agenda?
The Chair has asked Al Henley to review this item.
Al Henley: Thank you Joe. The Subdivision Variance to Section 4.4(b) of the Subdivision
ordinance that requires all newly created lots meet all the requirements of the City Zoning
Ordinance. Variances to lot width and area are requested. The address is 4300 Charity Neck
Road. The existing lot is over one (1) acre and apparently was created by deed in 1953 and
was conveyed by deed again in 1964. There is a dwelling on the property that was
constructed in 1940. The property has only 147.27 feet of frontage along Charity Neck
Road. The Zoning Ordinance requires 150 feet of lot width. In addition, after the required
dedication along Ithe roadway of Charity Neck Road, the parcel will fall under one (1) acre to
42,922 square feet Future plans for the property owner is to relocate the existing dwelling to
the rear of the property and then add on to the structure. Lots of this size were not considered
unusual and a few neighboring homes in the area are situated on lots close in size in
configuration to the applicant. Moreover, at one time, the lot was one acre in size, however,
due to requirements by the City of Virginia Beach for roadway dedications, the size of the lot
has decreased below one acre. Staff recommends approval of this application. Therefore,
the Planning Commission has placed this item on the consent agenda with the two attached
conditions. Thank you.
II
II
Item #5
Charles H. Dawson
Page 2
Joseph Strange: Thank you AI. Madame Chair, I will make a motion to approve agenda
item 5.
Janice Anderson: A motion by Joe Strange and a second by Gene Crabtree.
AYE 9 NAY 0 ABSO
ANDERSON AYE
BERNAS AYE
CRABTREE AYE
HENLEY AYE
HORSLEY
KA TSIAS AYE
LIVAS AYE
REDMOND AYE
RUSSO AYE
STRANGE AYE
ABSENT 1
ABSENT
Ed Weeden: By a vote of9-0, the Board has approved item 5 for consent.
II
II
BRUCE & KELLIE HENLEY
Relevant Information:
· Princess Anne District
. It is the intent of the applicant to subdivide 1.69 acres from the site,
to create Lot 3-8, to be developed with a single-family dwelling.
. A Subdivision Variance to lot width is required since, rather than 150
feet along Charity Neck Road, Lot 3-8 is proposed with only 25 feet
at the right-of-way.
. While there is additional property available along Charity Neck Road,
none of it is above the floodplain and would not count towards lot
width.
. The proposed configuration leaves as much property as possible
under cultivation.
Evaluation and Recommendation:
· Planning Staff recommended approval
· Planning Commission recommends approval (10-0).
· Consent Agenda.
· No opposition.
, II
I!
III '
~~~~
,J;).~~......~..s%
rCf..... ":t'
0;'/ ~ .. ..-,
(<::i - \'"
~~\~ ~~~
{~.;~.. .../.I}
~. ~..._..,...., "'" ..~
~.::-...,...,
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: BRUCE & KELLlE HENLEY, Subdivision Variance (lot width), east side of
Charity Neck Road, approximately 1500 feet south of North Muddy Creek Road
(GPIN 2412767181). PRINCESS ANNE DISTRICT.
MEETING DATE: February 24, 2009
. Background:
The existing lot is 21.75 acres and is currently a cultivated field. The lot width
along the right-of-way is 399 feet. It is the intent of the applicant to subdivide 1.69
acres from the site, to create Lot 3-B, to be developed with a single-family
dwelling on a lot above the 1 DO-year floodplain.
. Considerations:
The 1 DO-year floodplain within the Back Bay watershed is subject to special
restrictions as stipulated in the Site Plan, Subdivision, and Zoning ordinances. In
the Back Bay watershed, those areas cannot be counted toward the minimum lot
area or lot width requirements for subdivision purposes. As it is the applicant's
desire to keep as much property under cultivation as possible and to avoid the
development within the floodplain, the proposed layout, with the new parcel
located off of the roadway on a flag lot, was chosen over a layout that would
include floodplain and reduce area for cultivation. A Subdivision Variance to lot
width is required since, rather than 150 feet along Charity Neck Road, Lot 3-8 is
a flag lot with only 25 feet at the right-of-way. While there is additional property
available along Charity Neck Road, none of it is above the floodplain and would
not count towards lot width.
A Subdivision Variance is also required for the residual parcel, Lot 3-A, since, as
noted above, the entire 374 feet of frontage for that lot is within the 1 DO-year
floodplain. Again, while physically, Lot 3-A will have 374 feet along Charity Neck
Road, technically, due to the floodplain, the lot width is zero.
Staff concludes that the proposed lot configuration is the most appropriate,
because while physically, the entire lot has almost 400 feet of frontage along
Charity Neck Road, by creating a flag lot, it avoids the possibility of impact to the
floodplain, but most importantly, it leaves as much property as possible under
cultivation with the current property owner.
Bruce and Kelli13 Henley
Page 2 of 2
The Planning Commission placed this item on the consent agenda because there
was no opposition and the proposed lot configuration, while not meeting the
requirements of the ordinances lot width, provides a lot outside the floodplain and
preserves the maximum area possible for cultivation.
. Recommendations:
The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 9-0 to approve
this request with the following conditions:
1. The property shall be divided substantially as shown on the plat entitled
"Subdivision of Lot 3," dated October 24, 2008, prepared by Digital Survey
Services, L.L.C., which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council
and is on file in the Department of Planning.
2. The width and surface material for the driveway serving Lots 3-A and 3-B
shalll be subject to approval by the Fire Department and shall be depicted on
the site plan and any other necessary documents as determined by the
Dev4310pment Services Center of the Planning Department.
3. An ingress/egress easement providing use of the proposed ingress/egress for
Lots 3-A and 3-B shall be shown on the final subdivision plat.
. Attachments:
Staff Review
Disclosure Statement
Planningl Commission Minutes
Location Map
Recommended! Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends
approval.
I\~
Submitting Del)artmentlAgency: Planning Department
CItyManager: ~~ )L. "d&~
II
III '
BRUCE AND
KELLIE HENLEY
Agenda Item 6
January 14,2009 Public Hearing
STAFF PLANNER:
Carolyn A. K. Smith
REQUEST:
Subdivision Variance to Section 4.4(b) of the Subdivision Ordinance that requires all newly created lots meet
all the requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance. A variance to lot width is requested.
ADDRESS I DESCRIPTION: Property located on Charity Neck Road, south of N. Muddy Creek Road
GPIN:
24127671810000
ELECTION DISTRICT:
PRINCESS ANNE
SITE SIZE:
21.746 acres
AICUZ:
Less than 65 dB DNL
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
Existing Lot: The existing lot is 21.75 acres and is currently
cultivated field. The lot width along the right-of-way is 399
feet. Section 200(c) of the Zoning Ordinance excludes floodplain areas subject to special restrictions from
counting towards minimum lot area and lot width requirements. The actual area outside of the floodplain
for the total existing parcel is 6.69 acres and the total lot width outside the floodplain is 25 feet.
Proposed Lots: All newly created lots must meet minimum lot size and lot width requirements. In the
agricultural districts, these requirements are 15 acres per dwelling for density with a one acre minimum lot
size and 150 feet of lot width; however, Section 402(b) permits certain agricultural parcels, under specific
conditions, to be subdivided into two (2) building sites by right with a minimum lot area of one (1) acre
without meeting the 15 acre density requirement. This site does meet the requirements to take
advantage of this provision. It is the intent of the applicant to subdivide 1.69 acres from the site, to create
Lot 3-B, to be developed with a single-family dwelling, all of which is above the 1 OO-year floodplain. A
Subdivision Variance to lot width is required since, rather than 150 feet along Charity Neck Road, Lot 3-B
is proposed with only 25 feet at the right-of-way. While there is additional property available along Charity
Neck Road, none of it is above the floodplain and would not count towards lot width. As it is the
applicant's desire to keep as much property under cultivation as possible, the proposed layout was
BRUCE AND KELLlE HENLEY
Agenda Item 6
Page 1
chosen over a layout that would include floodplain in order to avoid the possibility of a Floodplain
Variance, but most importantly, it leaves as much property as possible to remain under cultivation.
A Subdivision Variance is also required for the residual parcel, Lot 3-A, as the entire 374 feet of frontage
for that lot is within the 1 OO-year floodplain. Floodplains within the Back Bay watershed are subject to
special restrictions as stipulated in the Site Plan, Subdivision and Zoning ordinances. In the Back Bay
watershed, areas below the 100-year floodplain cannot be counted toward the minimum lot area or lot
width requirements for subdivision purposes. Again, while physically, Lot 3-A will have 374 feet along
Charity Neck Road, technically, due to the floodplain, the lot width is zero.
J1em Lot 3-A Lot 3-8
Lot Width lin feet 150 0** 25*
Lot Area in SQuare feet 43,560 217,538 73,563
.Variance required
..Variance required due to the entire 374 feet of frontage within the floodplain.
LAND USE AND ZONING INFORMATION
EXISTING L~.ND USE: Cultivated field and woods
SURROUNDING LAND
USE AND ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
West:
. Cultivated field / AG-2 & AG -1 Agricultural Districts
. Cultivated field / AG-2 & AG -1 Agricultural Districts
. Marsh, woods / AG -1 Agricultural District
· Charity Neck Road, cultivated field / AG-2 & AG -1
Agricultural Districts
NATURAL RI:SOURCE AND
CULTURAL F~EATURES:
This property is located in the Southern Watersheds Management Area
and within the Back Bay watershed. Much of the site is located within
and/or below the 1 OO-year floodplain, a floodplain designated as "special
significance." Floodplains within the Back Bay watershed are subject to
special restrictions as stipulated in the Site Plan, Subdivision and Zoning
ordinances. A portion of the property is also identified as wetlands. The
residence and driveway (ingress/egress) are located out of the
environmentally sensitive portion of the site. All development would be
required to meet the regulations of the Southern Watersheds
Management Area Ordinance.
IMPACT ON CITY SERVICES
MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN (MTP) I CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP): Charity
Neck Road is considered a two-lane undivided local street. No CIP projects are slated for this area.
BRUCE AND KELLlE HENLEY
Agenda Item 6
Page 2
II
III '
TRAFFIC: Street Name Present Present Capacity Generated Traffic
Volume
Charity Neck No Data No Data Available Existing Land Use ;.( -
Road Available 217 ADT1
3
Proposed Land Use -
210 ADT1
1
Average Dally Trips
2 as defined by 21.74 acres of agricultural uses (1 trip per 10 acres)
3as defined by one single-family dwelling (10 ADT) plus 20.05 acres of agricultural uses
WATER & SEWER: There is no City water or sewer service to this property. Health Department approval for
wells and septic systems will be required.
Section 9.3 of the Subdivision Ordinance states:
No variance shall be authorized by the Council unless it finds that:
A. Strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship.
B. The authorization of the variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property,
and the character of the neighborhood will not be adversely affected.
C. The problem involved is not of so general or recurring a nature as to make reasonably
practicable the formulation of general regulations to be adopted as an amendment to the
ordinance.
D. The hardship is created by the physical character of the property, including dimensions
and topography, or by other extraordinary situation or condition of such property, or by
the use or development of property immediately adjacent thereto. Personal or self-
inflicted hardship shall not be considered as grounds for the issuance of a variance.
E. The hardship is created by the requirements of the zoning district in which the property is
located at the time the variance is authorized whenever such variance pertains to
provisions of the Zoning Ordinance incorporated by reference in this ordinance.
EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of this request.
Evaluation:
Section 402(b) of the City's Zoning Ordinance permits agricultural tracts over 15 acres, that existed prior
to June 28, 1994, to be subdivided into a total of two (2) sites provided that all state and local
development regulations are satisfied. As this lot was recorded in 1985, creating two (2) lots on this site
is not at issue; the issue at question is whether a hardship is present justifying a variance to allow a flag
lot and a second lot that, per the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, has no lot width,
BRUCE AND KELLlE HENLEY
Agenda Item 6
Page 3
In the Back Bay watershed, areas below the 100-year floodplain cannot be counted towards the minimum
lot area or minimum lot width requirements for subdivision purposes. In the Agricultural districts, the
Zoning Ordinance requires that these lots (based on Section 402 as described above) be one (1) acre in
size and havle 150 feet of lot width. Both of the proposed lots meet the minimum lot size; however, both
lots require a Subdivision Variance for lot width.
Lot 3-A is proposed with 20.05 total acres, however, the area above the floodplain is 4.99 acres. The
total lot width is counted as zero as the entire 374 feet along Charity Neck Road is within the floodplain
and cannot be counted. Lot 3-B is proposed with 1.69 total acres, all of which is above the floodplain. Lot
3-B will have approximately 25 feet of lot width along Charity Neck Road, and, as such, both lots require a
Subdivision Variance to lot width.
The area of tlhe parcel outside the floodplain and thus suitable for development bisects the property and
provides an appropriate area for the construction of a dwelling unit. The proposed subdivision of the
existing 21.74 acre parcel into two (2) lots would be allowed by right, under a different configuration, if the
property along the right-of-way were not below the 1 OO-year floodplain elevation. The proposed ingress-
egress easement sets up access to both lots outside of the floodplain; so, no Floodplain Variance is
anticipated in order to construct single-family dwellings on these lots.
Staff's position is that the proposed configuration is the most appropriate, because while physically, the
entire lot has almost 400 feet of frontage along Charity Neck Road, by creating a flag lot, it avoids the
possibility of a Floodplain Variance, but most importantly, it leaves as much property as possible to
remain under cultivation with the current property owner. In addition, two (2) lots would be allowed by
right if the property were not below the 1 OO-year floodplain elevation. The 1 OO-year floodplain creates a
significant eniCumbrance on this site. Staff recommends approval of the request with the following
conditions.
CONDITIONS
1. The property shall be divided substantially as shown on the plat entitled "Subdivision of Lot 3," dated
October 24,2008, prepared by Digital Survey Services, L.L.C., which has been exhibited to the
Virgirlia Beach City Council and is on file in the Department of Planning,
2. The width and surface material for the driveway serving Lots 3-A and 3-B shall be subject to approval
by tho Fire Department and shall be depicted on the site plan and any other necessary documents as
determined by the Development Services Center of the Planning Department.
3. An in!~ress/egress easement providing use of the proposed ingress/egress for Lots 3-A and 3-B shall
be shown on the final subdivision plat.
NOTE: Furth'ar 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.
BRUCE AND KELLlE HENLEY
Agenda Item 6
Page 4
II
III
AERIAL OF SITE LOCATION
BRUCE AND KELLlE HENLEY
Agenda Item 6
Page 5
,,,(
,t.. _,
"-,
~,.::;'I>
B.;i
j"lc
~!
IJ t
{_a
r1c
Ell
-", .--.
>><:
L
"
'11 f ~
"I,
,"
~ .#
9
I~
I
~
,~; '" ,,~,', ~,'
---
lIWiIo ll':lJilI ~
.%
t~
PROPOSED SUBDIVISION
BRUCE AND KELLlE HENLEY
Agenda It~!n 6
Page 6
II
III ;
\
\
':t':t
.n
~
M \ ~
~.l
~'\ ~
... ,...
I
w
..," ',1_ J
\
"
.~
.,)
I
,
!
~'\
.
.~
\ ,
" "
\ I
,\ ~ \
J J I
'J
/
I .;
..~\ .;
~5
rtllOf 1#;\
.-:A
fl,"
,,"
'It'
PROPOSED DWELLING
LOCATION DETAIL
BRUCE AND KELLlE HENLEY
Agenda Item 6
Page 7
Kellie Henle
MN
c.t
No Zoning History to Report
ZONING HISTORY
BRUCE AND KELLlE HENLEY
Agenda Itepl 6
Page 8
PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE
Complete this section only if property owner is different from applicant.
If the property owner is a corPoration, partnership, firm, business, or other
unincorporated organization, complete the following:
1. List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members,
trustees, partners. etc. below: (Attach list if necessary)
~ ~~----------------------------------------------------------------
" HENLEY FARM,LP - G WINSTON HENLEY & BARABRA HENLEY
Z
o
I I
~
E:
Q
~ 1&2S;;;;;-;xt~;g;to~fu;;ot~-
~
~
II
z
o
I I
~
I I
~
~
~
E3
III
I
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT I
APPLICANT DISCLOSURE
If the applicant is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated
organization, complete the following:
1. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers. members, trustees,
partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary)
2. List all businesses that have a parent-subsidiary1 or affiliated business enti';
. relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary)
m Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business. or
other unincorporated organization,
2. List all businesses that have a parent-subsidiary 1 or affiliated business entityl
relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary)
o Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm,
business, or other unincorporated organization.
Subdivision V Ilrianoe Application
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
BRUCE AND KELLlE HENLEY
Agenda Item 6
Page 9
~
z
o
I I
~
fE
Q
~
~
~
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
IDISCL.OSURESTATEMENT
J
ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES
List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect
to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural
services, real estate services, financial services, accounting services. and legal
services: (Attach list if necessary)
\ ~ITlAL SURVEY SERVICES LLC
-----------_:..&....:_------------------------_.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------.-------------------------- --------------------------------
1 "Parent-subsidiary relationship" means "a relationship that exists when one
corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting
power of another corporation.' See State and local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va.
Code ~ 2.2-3101.
2 "Affiliated business entity relationship" means "a relationship, other than parent-
subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a controlling ownership
interest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in one entity is also a controlling
owner in the other entity, or (iii) there is shared management or control between the business
entities. F~lctors that should be considered in determining the existence of an affiliated
business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person
own or manage the two entities; there are common or commingled funds or assets; the
business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities,
resources or personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship
between the entities." See State and local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code ~
2.2-3101.
CERTIFICATION: I certify that the infonnation contained herein is true and accurate,
I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for
public hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at
least 30 day:s prior to the scheduled public hearing according to the instructions in this package. The
undersigned also consents to entry upon the subject property by employees of the Department of
Planning to photograph and view the site for purposes of processing and evaluating this application,
~:;~f1J
U-----~---
Property Owner's Signatu
~ 1I1'~ J tkt\lt
i3~_P!L~~___
Print Name -J
C: ~_lL~Jt_U~J-
Print Name
Subdivislon Variar~ Application
Page 11 01 11
Revised 7/11106
z
o
I I
!:;;
u
:::3
=--
~
~
U
BRUCE AND KELLlE HENLEY
Agenda Item 6
Page 10
II
III
Item #6
Bruce & Kellie Henley
Subdivision Variance
East side of Charity Neck Road
District 7
Princess Anne
January 14,2009
CONSENT
Joseph Strange: The next matter is agenda item 6. An application of Bruce and Kellie
Henley for a Subdivision Variance, Subdivision of Bruce and Kellie Henley on property
located on the east side of Charity Neck Road, approximately 1500 feet south of North
Muddy Creek Road, District 7, Princess Anne with three conditions.
Bruce Henley: Good afternoon. I'm Bruce Henley.
Joseph Strange: Hi Bruce. Are the conditions acceptable?
Bruce Henley: Yes sir.
Joseph Strange: Well thank you very much.
Bruce Henley: Okay.
Joseph Strange: Is there any opposition to this matter being placed on the consent agenda?
The Chair has asked Dave Redmond to review this item.
David Redmond: Thank you Mr. Strange. The applicants Bruce and Kellie Henley are
requesting a Subdivision Variance to create a lot for a new residential dwelling. The existing
lot is 21.75 acres and is currently cultivated field. The Zoning Ordinance excludes floodplain
areas subject to special restrictions from counting toward minimum lot area and lot width
requirements. All newly created lots must meet minimum lot size and lot width
requirements. In the agricultural districts, these requirements are 15 acres per dwelling. for
density with a one acre minimum lot size and 150 feet oflot width, however, Section 402(b)
of the Zoning Ordinance permits certain agricultural parcels, under specific conditions, to be
subdivided into two (2) building sites by right with a minimum lot area of one (1) acre
without meeting the 15 acre density requirement. This site meets the requirements to take
advantage of this provision. The staffs position is that proposed configuration is the most
appropriate because, while physically the entire lot has almost 400 feet of frontage on
Charity Neck Road, by creating a flag lot, it avoids the possibility of a floodplain variance.
But most importantly, it leaves as much property as possible to remain under cultivation with
the current property owner. In addition, two lots would be allowed by-right if the property
was not below the 100 year floodplain elevation. As a result, staff recommends approval of
this application. The Commission concurs by consent. Thank you.
i
I
\.
Item #6
Bruce & Kellie Henley
Page 2
Joseph Strange: Okay. Thank you very much Dave. Madame Chair, I will make a motion to
approve agenda item 6.
Janice Anderson: A motion by Joe Strange and a second by Gene Crabtree.
AYE 9 NAY 0 ABSO
ANDERSON AYE
BERNAS AYE
CRABTREE AYE
HENLEY AYE
HORSLEY
KA TSIAS AYE
LIVAS AYE
REDMOND AYE
RUSSO AYE
STRANGE AYE
ABSENT 1
ABSENT
Ed Weeden: By a vote of 9-0, the Board has approved item 6 for consent.
~,
II
III
JOHN RODGER BURNS
AG-l
I}.
Subdivision Variance / flood Plain Variance
Relevant Information:
· Princess Anne District
· It is the intent of the applicant to subdivide a 1.812 acre parcel from
the larger 23.24 acre site to develop one (1) additional single-family
dwelling. The proposed lot has no frontage on a public right-of-way
due to the floodplain. Section 200(c) of the City Zoning ordinance
excludes floodplain areas subject to special restrictions from
counting towards minimum lot area and lot width requirements.
Evaluation and Recommendation:
· Planning Staff recommended approval.
· Planning Commission recommends approval (10-0).
· There was opposition.
II
III
~..."
,{~.l'~~h'
r~.r,.;:., ":t>'
(,..~. ...- \'-1
(8i' m
\\\~ /:J
~\".. ....f.!!
"'.~ ...,.....~
~. "......,...,'~-~
......"'-... ..
..,.,.~~
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: JOHN RODGER BURNS, Subdivision Variance and Floodplain Variance,
3477 Muddy Creek Road. PRINCESS ANNE DISTRICT.
MEETING DATE: February 24, 2009
. Background:
The existing lot is 23.24 acres and currently has one single-family dwelling
surrounded by berry fields. It is the intent of the applicant to subdivide a 1.812-
acre parcel from the larger 23.24 acre site to develop one (1) additional single-
family dwelling. The proposed lot has no frontage on a public right-of-way due to
the fact that floodplain subject to special restrictions is located along the
roadway. Section 200(c) of the City Zoning ordinance excludes floodplain areas
subject to special restrictions from counting towards minimum lot area and lot
width requirements.
Additionally, Section 5B.5 (b) and (c) of the Site Plan Ordinance note that new
residential dwelling structures in the floodplain subject to special restrictions are
not permitted and that filling within the floodplain subject to special restrictions is
not permitted. The applicant, therefore, requests a variance to allow fill for the
construction of a single-family dwelling.
. Considerations:
In the Back Bay watershed, areas below the 1 DO-year floodplain cannot be
counted towards the minimum lot area or minimum lot width requirements for
subdivision purposes. In the Agricultural districts, the Zoning Ordinance requires
that these lots (based on Section 402 as described above) be one (1) acre in size
and have 150 feet of lot width. Both the proposed new lot and the residual lot are
greater than the minimum lot size required though Proposed Parcel 2-A does not
have a full one acre outside the floodplain. Both lots require a Subdivision
Variance for lot width. Additionally, Proposed Parcel 2-A requires a Floodplain
Variance to allow the. construction of the dwelling in the floodplain subject to
special restrictions.
The applicant is providing a swale on the property outside the floodplain, which
will mitigate the area within the 1 DO-year floodplain that will be filled for the
dwelling foundation. The applicant's proposal indicates that with the floodplain
mitigation, the flood storage volume has been increased by 0.2 cubic feet. This
quantity of fill necessary is minimal. Staff concludes the fill will have no negative
John Rodger Burns
Page 2 of 2
impact on the function of the 1 DO-year floodplain. Additionally, an Authorized
Onsite Soils Evaluator determined that the drainfield location was in the best
soils on the site.
In regard to the variance request for lot width and lot area, Staff concludes that a
hardship does exist for this property, as virtually the entire site is located within
the floodplain subject to special restrictions.
There was opposition to the requests.
. Recommendations:
The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 9-0 to approve
the requests with the following condition:
The property shall be divided substantially as shown on the plat entitled
"Preliminary Subdivision Plat of Howard E. Stover & Virginia G. Stover"
dated July 24,2008, prepared by Gallup Surveyors and Engineers, Ltd.,
which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file
in the Department of Planning.
. Attachments:
Staff Review
Disclosure Statement
Planning Commission Minutes
Location Map
Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends
approval.
f
Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department
City Manager: ~ l.~DI"t
II
REQUESTS:
III
JOHN RODGER
BURNS
Agenda Items 11 & 12
January 14, 2009 Public Hearing
STAFF PLANNER:
Karen Prochilo
Floodolain Variance to Section 5B.5 (b) and (c) of the Site Plan Ordinance: new residential dwelling structures
in the floodplain subject to special restrictions are not permitted and filling within the floodplain subject to
special restrictions is not permitted. A variance to allow fill for the dwelling is requested.
Subdivision Variance to Section 4.4(b) of the Subdivision Ordinance that requires all newly created lots meet
all the requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance and to Section 4.4(d) of the Subdivision Ordinance: all newly
created lots must have direct access to a public street. Section 200 (c) of the Zoning Ordinance excludes
floodplain area subject to special restrictions from counting towards minimum lot area and lot width
requirements and the Zoning Ordinance requires all newly created lots to adhere to the requirements of the
Subdivision Ordinance. Variances to lot width and area are requested.
ADDRESS I DESCRIPTION: 3477 Muddy Creek Road.
GPIN:
2422047291
ELECTION DISTRICT:
PRINCESS ANNE
SITE SIZE:
Total acres: 23.24 acres
Proposed Parcel 2-A: 1.812 acres
AICUZ:
Less than 65 dB DNL
Existing Lot: The existing lot is 23.24 acres and currently has
one single family dwelling surrounded by berry fields.
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
Proposed Lots: It is the intent of the applicant to subdivide a 1.812 acre parcel from the larger 23.24
acre site to develop one (1) additional single-family dwelling. The proposed lot has no frontage on a
JOHN RODGER BURNS
Agenda Item 11 &12
Page 1
pUblic right-of-way due to the floodplain. Section 200{c) of the City Zoning ordinance excludes floodplain
areas subject to special restrictions from counting towards minimum lot area and lot width requirements.
.I1em Lot 2-A Lot 2-8 Residual
Lot Width in feet 150 feet 0* 0*
Lot Area in square feet 43,560 SF 78,930.72 SF* 933,31.56 SF
*Variance required
LAND USE AND ZONING INFORMATION
EXISTING LAND USE: Rural residential and berry farm
SURROUNDIING LAND
USE AND ZCINING:
North:
South:
East:
West:
. Single-family dwelling / AG-1 & 2 Agricultural Districts
. Single-family dwelling / AG-1 & 2 Agricultural Districts
. Muddy Creek Road
· Single-family dwelling / AG-1 & 2 Agricultural Districts
. Cultivated fields
NATURAL RIESOURCE AND
CULTURAL FEATURES:
This property is located within the Southern Watershed. A portion of the
property is located within floodplain of special significance.
IMPACT ON CITY SERVICES
MASTER "RANSPORTATION PLAN CMTP) I CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM CCIP): Muddy
Creek Road is a two-lane undivided collector. There are no plans in the current MTP for this road.
TRAFFIC: Street Name Present Present Capacity Generated Traffic
Volume
Muddy Creek 295 ADT 1 7,400 ADT 1 ; 490 peak Existing Land Use ""7 -
Road 21 peak hour hour (Level of Service "cn) 10 ADT
12,000 ADT 1 ; 790 peak Proposed Land Use 3 -
hour (Level of Service "Dn 20 ADT
-Caoacitv)
Average Dally Tnps
2 as defined by one single-family dwelling
3 as defined by two single-family dwellings
The installaticln of a 70 watt HPSV cobra-head flat lens streetlight along the portion of the property that fronts
Muddy Creek Road may be required.
WATER & SE:WER: There is no City water or sewer service to this property. Health Department approval for
well and septic system is required.
JOHN RODGER BURNS
Agenda Item 11 &12
Page 2
11
III
EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of this request.
Comprehensive Plan:
The Comprehensive Plan recognizes this site to be within the "Rural Area". The area is characterized as
low, flat land with wide floodplains and altered drainage. The Comprehensive Plan recognizes this area
as agricultural and rural with uses related to farming, forestry, rural residential and other rurally
compatible uses.
Evaluation:
In the Back Bay watershed, areas below the 100-year floodplain cannot be counted towards the minimum
lot area or minimum lot width requirements for subdivision purposes, In the Agricultural districts, the
Zoning Ordinance requires that these lots (based on Section 402 as described above) be one (1) acre in
size and have 150 feet of lot width. Both of the proposed lots are greater than the minimum lot size
required though Proposed Parcel 2-A does not have a full acre outside the floodplain. Both lots require a
Subdivision Variance for lot width. Additionally, Proposed Parcel 2-A requires a Floodplain Variance to
allow the construction of the dwelling in the floodplain subject to special restrictions.
The applicant is providing a swale on the property outside the floodplain, which will mitigate the area
within the 100-year floodplain that will be filled for the dwelling foundation. The applicant's proposal
indicates that with the floodplain mitigations the flood storage volume has been increased by 0.2 cubic
feet. This quantity of fill necessary is minimal. Staff concludes will have no negative impact on the
function of the 1 OO-year floodplain. Additionally, an Authorized Onsite Soils Evaluator determined that the
drainfield location was in the best soils on the site.
In regard to the variance request for lot width and lot area, Staff concludes that a hardship does exist for
this property, as virtually the entire site is located within the floodplain subject to special restrictions.
In sum, Staff recommends approval of these requests with the following condition.
CONDITION
The property shall be divided substantially as shown on the plat entitled "Preliminary Subdivision Plat of
Howard E. Stover & Virginia G. Stover" dated July 24, 2008, prepared by Gallup Surveyors and Engineers,
Ltd., which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file in the Department of Planning.
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.
JOHN RODGER BURNS
Agenda Item 11 &12
Page 3
AERIAL OF SITE LOCATION
JOHN RODGER BURNS
Agenda Item 11 &12
Page 4
11
III
....... .
.. ~tltl'!':M"~" OIUoNaI
I ..<<-~~(~~
\ . tL& ~411/1 .'
\ ;
II
--.......
.'
.' .,
1 ..;ioo-'~w,-
~-,-_..,
2-8
RtEL
..
flWf-=
"'~,
... ~tl" ..,.
li'Nlt; J.lJ.~ 1,)0. ""'
I"
r
--
...
'I ;
!
i-'j,;+~
I ,
t.~'i)tidS
~~::. ..
0<< t4O! p 11~ ~:lIl.~
eHt""U~~J.-..'~:f1"J
~
I"AIlCEL M ..
.....m.__..:=':-"'=" T-=::::::"='k---
IL
,~Y
,
.~...--~
"~,^",-,,~~~ "
,- - ~ -
;.-..
.,
f- ~ r"'r~~
I
'! , 'I
j I!
,I , II
; I ! i r,i
I' ,;
..!~~~;
, II ,i
III ;; I
, I i I
Iii
T'I1t PI
I ! 1:rr';
,( ,
I '~l l I
1< :,
i ~~!I 1'1
,< 'i....!1
./,>"I""i"(, "I" l,
, . <;; I,
I ,: ~II,
~,.----4 f j ~J ,I
,~ ',' till i,
, ~ I I!
f :1H
..~ J ( ,"
~ I
t II
I , I
'~d I:
..~I
I :1:
.' 'I'
: ,;';o"h
-I' ,~
.~ h
., ... ... ~
..
\..
I
\
r~~~
..
~t
-_."."""',.,
_,...._t-ll
I"IIOPCIEl) t
..
..
rwo...._.....
..
..
.'
~..............
~,"'}
~.__., v__....__I/I
..
i. -..-..
"
II
_ to'.......
., ""$
WIt tu'-t'*
PROPOSED SUBDIVISION
JOHN RODGER BURNS
Agenda Item 11 &12
Page 5
PHOTOGRAPH OF EXISTING SITE
JOHN RODGER BURNS
Agenda Item 11 &12
Page 6
11
III
Map M-15
Mep Not to Scele
AG-l
(]
O.
Subdivision Variance / Flood Plain Variance
08/10/1993
01/25/1994
Granted
Granted
Subdivision Variance
Ex ansion of a Nonconformin
ZONING HISTORY
JOHN RODGER BURNS
Agenda Item 11 &12
Page 7
z
o
I I
~
U
I I
~
~
ea
~
u
~
z
o
I I
~
~
~
c:Q
~
~
fl
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 11
APPLICANT DISCLOSURE
If the applicant is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated
organization, complete the following:
1. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees,
partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary)
2. List all businesses that have a parent-subsidiary 1 or affiliated business entity2
relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary)
rn Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business. or
other unincorporated organization.
PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE
Complete this section only if property owner is different from applicant.
If the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other
unincorporated organization, complete the following:
1. List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members,
trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary)
2. List all businesses that have a parent-subsidiary 1 or affiliated business entity2
relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary)
IX] Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm,
business, or other unincorporated organization.
1 & 2 See next page for footnotes
Subdivision Variance Application
Page 1001 11
Revised: 7/11106
JOHN RODGER BURNS
Agenda Item 11 &12
Page 8
II
"" .
II DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
~
ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES
List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect
to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural
services, real estate services, financial services, accounting services, and legal
services: (Attach list if necessary)
Gallup Surveyors & Engineers, Ltd.
Tidewater Soils & Design, LLC (Joel Demers, AOSE)
, .Parent-subsidiary relationship. means 'a relationship that exists when one
corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting
power of another corporation." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va.
Code ~ 2.2-3101.
2 "Affiliated business entity relationship. means "a relationship, other than parent-
subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a controlling ownership
interest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in one entity is also a controlling
owner in the other entity, or (iii) there is shared management or control between the business
entities. Factors that should be considered in determining the existence of an affiliated
business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person
own or manage the two entities; there are common or commingled funds or assets; the
business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities,
resources or personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship
between the entities." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code ~
2.2-3101.
CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate.
I understand that. upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for
public hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at
least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing according to the instructions in this package, The
undersigned also consents to entry upon the subject property by employees of the Department of
Planning to photograph and v' e site for purposes of processing and evaluating this application.
~ bwws
Print Name
_Ic;t, Y\ R, Bu it1 'S: .;jIG
Print Name
Subdivision Variance Application
Page 11 of 11
Revised 7/11106
III
z
o
I I
~
U
~
~
~
~
U
~
Z
o
I I
~
E
c::l
=
;:::J
~
JOHN RODGER BURNS
Agenda Item 11 &12
Page 9
Item # 11 & 12
John Rodger Burns
Subdivision Varlance
Floodplain Variance
3477 Muddy Cn::ek Road
District 7
Princess Anne
January 14, 2009
REGULAR
Jay Bernas: The next item on the agenda is item 11 & 12, John Rodger Burns, an application
of John Rodger Bums for a Subdivision Variance, and an application of John Rodger Bums
for a Floodplain Variance on property located at 3477 Muddy Creek Road, District 7,
Princess Anne with one condition.
John Rodger Burns: John Rodger Burns. Good afternoon. Again, you already addressed the
address, 3477 Muddy Creek Road. It is about 23 acre "you pick" blueberry farm. It has been
there for approximately 30 years. I'm representing my father who owns the property. What
were looking at doing is going through the subdivision process to go ahead and create a
single-family residential structure there up front, on about 1.8 acre subdivision. It's here
before you today to ask for your recommendation for approval of the floodplain variance and
the subdivision variance.
Janice Anderson: Are there any questions? Thank you. We'll bring you back up.
John Rodger Bums: Thank you.
Jay Bernas: We have one person signed up in opposition. Joyce Weaver.
Joyce Weaver: Hello. Thank you for taking the time to hear me today. I hope I can say
what I need to say in the allotted time that I have.
Janice Anderson: State your name?
Joyce Weaver: I'm Joyce Weaver. My family has lived on Muddy Creek Road for well over
40 something years. In 1987, my dad was retired and he built chairs out of his garage. They
did an article for him in the Beacon. He was 75 years old at that time. He had a garage and
he had power tools, and saws, and drill presses. Every kind of tool and electrical tool you
could think of. In the 90s, Mr. Burns, the older Mr. Bums had the blueberry farm and they
became to my parents to ask us they were opening up a fishing pond. And, then later on the
road, they wanted to build a house but the land wouldn't perk. So, they got a crane and they
dug a ditch all the around the perimeter of the property. And, we were told at that time that
the runoff from that water would not affect us. The floodgates would be installed. Well, after
the property was all drained out, we have a ditch beside our house and it has been there a
very long time. And, that is where all the water runs off from the blueberry farm. When they
II
III
Item #11 & 12
John Rodger Burns
Page 2
dug the ditch around the perimeter, Charity Neck Road runs parallel to Muddy Creek Road.
Now all year, we take in the water from the blueberry farm that is running offofMuddy
Creek, we're also taking the water that comes from the farms from Winky and Barbara
Henley that live on Charity Neck Road. We were told they were going to put in floodgates at
that time. And, that would keep our land from flooding. That is going to slow down the flow
of water that we having going by my house. On Muddy Creek Road we have the roads that
flood all the time. I have pictures that were sent in, I guess. I don't know if you got a
picture out of a booklet (Mr. Bum's letter) of my property. Well, on that booklet, it's got a
front page of it. It shows a floodgate right here on the front page. Did you get this? Okay.
If you look at this floodgate on here, the same day this picture was taken by Mr. Bums, Jr. I
was with him, and I had my camera too. What you are not seeing on that picture is the
floodgate is not located on this side of the ditch but on the other side of the ditch where the
little tree is. The floodgates have not been used in years. There is a bush growing up in it.
They have not slowed the runoff of that water. I have pictures if you would like to see and
verify that page number one is incorrect. Now, I am in low land and the water table you
cannot change. Water table on anybody's land is going to be even. My concern is what is
the impact going to be if they are allowed to build that house? My front yard is flooded. The
water is coming across the road. And the Burns' house, when you go back to the blueberry
farm, the main driveway going back with the sign, there is not even a pipe in the road. They
have a berm going back there. There is no way for that water coming off of that farm to go
into any of the side ditches. There is a ditch that comes straight across the road from my
property. And they have been complaining that the natural little ditch right next to the house
at the front., they feel if I would dig that out that would resolve the problem. The only thing
that is doing is slowing down the flow of water that is coming in my yard. That ditch goes
back through Federal property and through the wildlife section. There is "No Trespassing" on
that land. I am concerned about what the impact is going to be of more water runoff from the
roof, from sidewalks, from the driveways, from the apron that the city make you put in on
new construction, as well as sewer, the septic sewer system. It is going to put more water
into that ground. It is going to create more runoff for this property. If you look on page 3,
(handout from Mr. Bums) these are the ditches. These ditches, and if you go back and look
at the ditches, all ofthem are angled down this way. The arrows pointing towards my house.
The city ditches are running down to my house on this side further down, you have a pipe in
the road that all that water comes in on me. A neighbor of mine, Mr. Davenport could not be
here today but he did send a letter. Because in front of his house, when we have a rain, and
I'm talking about 2 inches of rain, there is water that is across Muddy Creek Road. Further
down on that road too, there is a house there directly in front of Horn Point Road, they do not
have pipes in the road. That is another berm that is keeping the water from drainage in that
area. My concern is the impact if I am this flooded, how much more additional water runoff
and I going to have from the Bums' farm?
Janice Anderson: Are there any questions of Ms. Weaver? Have you reported the drainage
issue to the City Public Works?
Joyce Weaver: I have talked with Public Works. They have come out there and drained the
ditches. I also face another problem with the property. Located right behind me is the North
Item #11 & 12
John Rodger Bums
Page 3
Bay, and if we have a strong side west wind for five or six days, that is the alpha bay. You
have North Bay, Back Bay. It goes all the way down to the Currituck Sound (that bodies the
water). We have a lot wind and a long period of time. It is going to backwash in to my yard
and floods it. So, the issue of trying to dig the ditch out beside me is just going to allow
water to stand there even in dry periods. I'm concerned about the West Nile virus and the
mosquito control. On the blueberry farm, like I said, they have a berm going back on the
lane and they an~ able to have Public Works. We're happy to have it. They can go back
there and they can spray their area. On my piece ofland beside the ditch by my house, I
don't have a driveway where the city can actually come in and do any spraying. This is my
concern, I am on low land. I do fight water. I spent the last three years doing construction. A
lot I did myself. And, I just want to be able to live in my home. I want to be able to not have
to wait for the water to go down to cut grass. I have to wait for different things now. A little
rain, this sort of thing, and then again, the runoff from that water is my main concern.
Janice Anderson: Okay. Thank you Ms. Weaver. Are there any questions? Thank you very
much.
Joyce Weaver: Thank you for listening. I was nervous.
Janice Anderson: Mr. Burns? You can come back. Can you kind of address her?
John Rodger Burns: Yes, most definitely. First of all, I would like to thank her for bringing
this up. There arle concerns there and obviously it has been a concern of hers for some time. I
don't know a lot of the details behind her property because I haven't been back there. There
was a letter written from her. It explained some of these items. And, I don't want to reiterate
what you have already received. But the packet I put together that addressed those items.
Hopefully, they answered some of the questions some of the information that she is
discussing. I am not an engineer. I just manage the berm and the city ditches and the way
they are flowing, which direction they're flowing. That is not my specialty. I don't know. I
do know that whtm it rains out there, a good three inch rain, we are five foot above sea level
in certain areas of our farm, and I can't cut the fields for a while either. So, unfortunately that
area of the city, a hundred acres are flowing to the direction to Back Bay. That water wants
to go to Back Bay. The ditches are what they are. It is only going to run so fast or so slow to
get to where it wants to go. She has been out there a lot longer than we have lived out there.
She has been aware of these flooding issues living there. Unfortunately, just like the rest of
the people that live out there, you have a choice. If it is wet all the time and you don't like to
wait on the water to cut the grass then you have choices. You can live somewhere else. Not
to suggest that anyone needs to move away from there. It is a beautiful part of the City.
That is one of the reasons why I want to locate my family there. But my concern is that the
facts are out there. What is going on? The misinformation about some of the devices that we
put in the ditches and the way they operate. It is my understanding that there is someone
from the city that is going to come out and look at this project. There are floodgates. There
are water retention devices used for irrigation purposes, designed and engineered from the
soil conservation people for that purpose. There are many farms that do drain down those
ditches. I don't know what improvements can be done to benefit the community there to
III
Item #11 & 12
John Rodger Burns
Page 4
draining better. But that is something that the City's engineers, they are experts, can decide.
So, I'll be more than happy to answer any questions that I can about the property. I'm sorry.
The last thing is I understand there are issues with the ongoing farm that is there. But as far
as the property and the development of the single-family residential, I don't know how that is
really impacting the overall scheme of water runoff through that area. So, I don't know my
project is going to harm or add any more water flow through those hundred of acres that are
running in that direction.
Janice Anderson: You have contacted the City of Public Works?
John Rodger Bums: I have not directly. I have talked with the staff planner and that is what
I have been advised. Ms. Weaver and I did discuss the day after our last meeting what we
could do. How can we improve for the community not just for her or me, but for the
neighborhood? And there are issues of runoff over the road when it doesn't rain. And
again, the pictures that you have there are, I mean they are subjective to who has taken them
from whatever day. How much rain it rains? I don't know. It is what it is and what you see
in the pictures. If it is something that the City needs to come down and look at, we are more
than pleased to help to them.
Janice Anderson: Thank you. Gene?
Eugene Crabtree: John?
John Rodger Burns: Yes sir.
Eugene Crabtree: The farm also drains towards the back and the woods toward the back..
John Rodger Bums: Oh yes sir.
Eugene Crabtree: And also, part of the farm also drains to the fish ponds. You got two fish
ponds there and those two fish ponds, when you develop your section with the fish ponds,
which we can see on this (map). You can see the two fish ponds right behind where he is
going to put his stuff and knowing that the some of the water there not only drains to the
ditches in front and drains down and all. Actually it drains a little bit east and west there and
some of it does go north back towards Back Bay. But also, some of it drains back toward the
wooded area on your dad's property there too. When you build your house, how much of the
runoff of what you were going to build will probably maybe run back toward the fish pond
instead of towards the road anyway? Do you know what the landscape is going to be there to
develop the runoff and will any of it go back toward the fish pond?
John Rodger Bums: There is a retaining ditch right there or a runoff ditch right here across
the property (pointing to PowerPoint). As far as the ponds, they are approximately an acre
each. This area here does drain to the ponds. There is a ditch here that the property does run
too. There is standing water. Obviously after a large rain back in the area. Some of these
fields you can't get to until it soaks into the property itself. As far as the amount of water that
Item # 11 & 12
John Rodger Bums
Page 5
is going to runoff from the construction, I don't know. I don't know how the direction is. I
know that the highland is like this so the direction of the flow would be away from this.
Eugene Crabtre(~: That one comer right there where you see some of the trees all along there,
that is a little higher land right there anyway.
John Rodger Bums: Yes sir. But it is not, to my understanding, but there more floodplain
farther down and that is why the variance is needed. It is not completely together.
Eugene Crabtree:: But that is a little bit higher than the rest of it.
John Rodger Bums: Yes sir. And just for clarification purposes, Ms. Weaver's property is
over here on this corner. The ditch that we are questioning is running this way through the
right at the edge of the wood line, and most of the flooding that I see when it does rain is
further down the road prior to Horn Point Road. It is away from where my proposed
residential site sitting and those ditches on side of the road here, the one that runs this way,
one that runs this way. When the water backs up it is running up and down Muddy Creek
Road. It is not like it is flowing over the street right into her property. The berm ditches is
actually right here on this edge. As far as how much impact that has on reducing the flow
that is something that engineers is going to have to figure out. I do know that Back Bay,
when we get those wind driven tides when they come in, they do back up the runoff not just
to that ditch but that whole are down there. The restaurant down the road it backs up. All the
ditches tend to back up from that issue. That is a separate flooding issue. That is not from
necessarily the falling rain. That is from the wind driven tides. So there are multiple
concerns there but that is something that has been there for years. It is not something that I
think my project is going to impact the overall water shed off of that area. To me, it is a
significant amount of water that is going to impact the ongoing issues that are there now prior
to me even starting any kind of residential structure.
Janice Anderson: Are there any other questions of Mr. Burns? Okay. Thank you.
John Rodger Burns: Thank you very much. I appreciate your time.
Janice Anderson: I'll open it up for discussion. AI.
Al Henley: Just for the record, I've know Joyce Weaver and her family for probably over 40
years. And as most of you know that was part of my neighborhood on Horn Point Road. I
will say that this area is subject to wind pact flooding. Always has been and always will be.
And the tide elevation of the Back.Bay does stay higher now, and there has been many
discussion on why that occurs and primarily it is because more prevailing southern winds
then there has ewr been even when I was much younger. So that means that more flooding
in these low lying areas is more prevalent now then they ever have. There are two head
falls. One is down the private lane that you see immediately to the north on that line. It goes
under the street right beside Ms. Weaver's house, and it drains out eventually to Back Bay.
From that particular point at the back of her yard to the nearest point of entry toward North
III
Item # 11 & 12
John Rodger Burns
Page 6
Bay Tributary is probably about close two miles. However, in the marshy area behind the
wooded is a natural pond. All of the water from the farm land on Muddy Creek Road drains
eventually through that same natural pond. There is another outfall if you look at the lower
portion where the cluster of homes are, of course, you will see a large hedge to the back and
it is an open ditch. If you can see that definition, that is a larger outfall. And there is another
outfall farther down the road. So, there are really three outfalls to this same location body of
water within in three-quarters of a mile. That drains quite a bit of agricultural land and
developed land that you see there today. The problem with the drainage on that road, and
that has increased dramatically through the years, and the reason why it has developed is
because the City of Virginia Beach has not maintained the outfall. History, stepping back in
time, the adjoining property owner's years ago used to join together and clean these ditches
out because it would benefit everyone. That was in the Princess Anne County days. Virginia
Beach took over after the State and that ceased. However today, in Public Works we have a
Stormwater Management division and working closely with mosquito control. Stormwater
Management cleans roadside ditches and lead ditches throughout the entire city and
maintains the drainage. This particular area you can't get equipment in. The only way you
can clean these ditches out is through hand labor, and that is sending individuals in with hand
tools and primarily when you do that, that is mosquito control divisions. They do have the
authority to gain permission signature from the adjoining property owners allowing them on
to the property to clean these ditches out providing there is no existing drainage easement. I
. don't think there is a drainage easement next to Ms. Weaver. So, if the City came in and they
would had obtained permission from Ms. Weaver or the other property owners, they would
come in with some labor forces and clean these ditches out. To my knowledge the last time
that ditch was cleaned out on Horn Point Road, it drains behind Ms. Weaver was roughly 30
years ago. And they cleaned it out and it improved the drainage considerably. However, the
ditch beside Ms. Weaver has not been cleaned out probably at least 30 or more years. So, in
summation, if Public Works went in and properly investigated it, they would go in and clean
this ditch. However, if I'm not mistaken Bill, there is a State statute stating that if for some
reason, health reasons are threatened by the citizens of Virginia Beach, mosquito control
would have their authority whether they obtained written permission or not from the property
owners to go in and correct those conditions. And, you may want to check on that. But my
knowledge that is way the law used to be. Whether it has changed or not, I don't know. It
would be a great deal of improvement. It would improve a traffic safety problem at this
particular time because the water does flood Muddy Creek Road, and it might become
extremely dangerous when these ditches are blocked. So, just to give you for the record that
is the history of the area. And, it is badly in need of cleaning out. And it is my understanding
that Public Works has been alerted and they will make a thorough investigation to find out
what is best for the City of Virginia Beach, and the citizens in that particular neighborhood.
Thank you.
Janice Anderson: Thank you very much.
I
\
Karen Prochilo: Just for the record, staff did contact Public Works. Public Works has been
out there once. They plan on going back out there because they really need to assess the
Item #11 & 12
John Rodger Burns
Page 7
situation. And, they are going to provide a report which you should be getting shortly
between Planning Commission and City Council.
Janice Anderson: Okay. Thank you. The Council will have that when it comes to them.
Karen Prochilo: Yes.
Janice Anderson: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other comments? Kathy?
Kathy Katsias: Karen, do you think this application is affected by the drainage?
Karen Prochilo: I can't tell you as far as the drainage situation because we haven't been out
there to see it when it was wet. But we weren't looking at the stormwater, not drainage
because of the ditches. We were looking at the floodplain issue and the subdivision variance.
And, our assessment is in the report.
Kathy Katsias: Thank you.
Janice Anderson: Go ahead Gene.
Eugene Crabtree: Al and I mentioned this earlier at the informal meeting. We do not
believe this parti,cular application is not going to have any bearing on that whatsoever. That
the water and the: floodplain is one thing or another is there. They have been there all of his
life. I've been going out to this property probably since the mid 80's off and on. It has been
there ever since l've seen it. That one ditch is been there. It has never been cleaned out.
You don't know what is going to happen if you clean it out but this application is not going
to have no bearing to what happens one way or the other in the past or the future.
Janice Anderson: Thank you. My comment would be similar. It does appear there is a
drainage issue out there. I am happy to hear that Public Works is going to go out there and
come back with some kind of assessment and try to fix it. I don't believe that this application
is going to have any affect one way or the other. Unfortunately, there is a problem that they
have out there and I would be supportive.
Eugene Crabtree: I'll make a motion that we approve the application as submitted.
Janice Anderson: A motion by Gene.
Joseph Strange: I'll second it.
Janice Anderson: A second by Joe Strange.
AYE 9
NAY 0
ABSO
ABSENT 1
ANDERSON AYE
Item #11 & 12
John Rodger Burns
Page 8
BERNAS
CRABTREE
HENLEY
HORSLEY
KA TSIAS
LIV AS
REDMOND
RUSSO
STRANGE
III
AYE
AYE
AYE
ABSENT
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
Ed Weeden: By a vote of9-0, the Board has approved the application of John Rodger Burns.
\ I \~ · o~
-r.~~ ~\D *\.\'
\jJ~~
ED DAVENPORT
3462 MUDDY au;!K RO.
. ~BEACH.Y/tr-~
~ W~\ 1((~f\~~V\"
<7\.,~c;i3 ~v\:c UJ I M?A-G<'\
df ~~ C6'---' ~\Acsfl~ ~~~
... \SSV I tJ<S" ~\~ >
'0'b~\~~~ ~/r-.-t <S \~
\~~C ~8J)'V0 ~€ ~. (
<,,\~N~ ~RA I~ A'D~f'V~
~~ ,-\ovC2- -A<?S\<S~~ }/J
~7 ~~'?
~\ru ccl2-6cy /
~~l~." '
f f(J\, \~ \,
\.,.....G ~}) If \i
&Q
\
II
III
1 06/27/00 Non-Conforming Granted
2 12/21/81 Street Closure Granted
ZONING HISTORY
STEPHEN C. SWAIN
February 24, 2009 City Council Meeting
Page 9
II
III
~
~ --z~'
;e f7~~
~. ~ .J
... -- ;.;
\. -,jI
~~
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM:
A Resolution Authorizing Enlargement of a Nonconforming Use on
Property Located at 1107 Cedar Point Drive. DISTRICT 6 - BEACH
MEETING DATE: February 24, 2009
. Background: The applicant, Stephen C. Swain, desires to make additions and
alterations to the existing two-story (two bedroom) single-family dwelling. The
applicant's alterations are considered changes to an existing nonconforming use
because there are currently two dwellings on the parcel (single-family house and
guest house) and the City Zoning Ordinance does not permit two single-family
dwellings on one lot in R-10 Residential District.
. Considerations: There are two structures located on this site: (1) a two story
single-family dwelling built in 1981 and (2) a 1 %-story cottage used as a
pool/guest house. City staff could not confirm the actual date the pool/guest
house was built, but based on architecture and related structures in the area,
staff concludes the structure was built around the late 1940's to early 1950's.
The two story single family dwelling is 3,220 square feet. This symmetrical
dwelling was inspired by a Provincial style of architecture. The use of stucco with
a cedar-shake flared mansard roof has somewhat of a French Eclectic feel. The
applicant will continue to use similar materials and carry the same symmetrical
design for the proposed addition.
The proposed two-story addition will expand each floor by 750 square feet. The
first floor will incorporate an expansion to the kitchen, a family room as well as a
bedroom with bathroom. The second floor revisions will expand an existing
bedroom, as well as add two additional rooms. The total expansion will be 1,500
square feet. This addition will not encroach into side yard setbacks. The
proposed addition will extend 20 feet to the north leaving a side yard setback of
11'- 9".
. Recommendations: The proposed enlargement is reasonable, will have a
minimal impact, and should be as appropriate to the district as the existing non-
conforming use. Approval of the request is recommended with the following
conditions:
1. The additions to the single-family dwelling shall substantially adhere to the
submitted architectural floor plans entitled "ADDITIONS & ALTERATIONS
TO THE SWAIN RESIDENCE 1107 Cedar Point Drive Virginia Beach First
Floor Plan A-1 and Second Floor Plan A-2", dated July 07, 2008, and
prepared by Folck West Architects. Said plan has been exhibited to the
Stephen C. Swain
Page 2 of 2
City of Virginia Beach City Council and is on file in the Planning
Department. Interior room layout may be modified; however, the addition
may not extend beyond the footprint shown on the floor plans.
2. The additions to the single-family dwelling shall substantially adhere to the
submitted elevation plans entitled "ADDITIONS & ALTERATIONS TO THE
SWAIN RESIDENCE 1107 Cedar Point Drive Virginia Beach Front & Rear
Elevations A-4 and Side Elevations A-5", dated July 07, 2008, and
prepared by Folck West Architects. Said plan has been exhibited to the
City of Virginia Beach City Council and is on file in the Planning
Department.
. Attachrnents: Staff Review; Disclosure Statement; Resolution
Recommende!d Action: Approval.
\
Submitting D~partmentJAgenCY: Planning Department A ~\
City Manager: ~ .~bP't ~ .
II
III
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
ENLARGEMENT OF A NONCONFORMING
USE ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1107
CEDAR POINT DRIVE, BEACH DISTRICT
WHEREAS, Stephen C. Swain (hereinafter the "Applicant") has made application
to the City Council for authorization to enlarge a nonconforming use by making
additions to and alterations of a single-family dwelling on a certain lot or parcel of land
having the address of 1107 Cedar Point Drive, in the R-10 Zoning District;
WHEREAS, the said use is nonconforming, as the parcel contains a single-family
dwelling and guesthouse constructed prior to the adoption of zoning regulations
prohibiting two such structures on the same lot; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 105 of the city Zoning Ordinance, the
enlargement of a nonconforming use is unlawful in the absence of a resolution of the
City council authorizing such action upon a finding that the proposed use, as enlarged,
will be equally appropriate or more appropriate to the zoning district than is the existing
use;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:
That the City Council hereby finds that the proposed use, as enlarged, will be
equally appropriate to the district as is the existing use.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA
BEACH, VIRGINIA:
That the enlargement of the single-family dwelling, by additions and alterations is
hereby authorized, upon the following conditions:
1. The additions to the single-family dwelling shall substantially adhere to the
submitted architectural floor plans entitled "ADDITIONS & ALTERATIONS
TO THE SWAIN RESIDENCE 1107 Cedar Point Drive Virginia Beach First
Floor Plan A-1 and Second Floor Plan A-2", dated July 07, 2008, and
prepared by Folck West Architects. Said plan has been exhibited to the
City of Virginia Beach City Council and is on file in the Planning
Department. Interior room layout may be modified; however, the addition
may not extend beyond the footprint shown on the floor plans.
2. The additions to the single-family dwelling shall substantially adhere to the
submitted elevation plans entitled "ADDITIONS & ALTERATIONS TO THE
SWAIN RESIDENCE 1107 Cedar Point Drive Virginia Beach Front & Rear
Elevations A-4 and Side Elevations A-5", dated July 07, 2008, and
prepared by Folck West Architects. Said plan has been exhibited to the
47
48
49
50
51 of
City of Virginia Beach City Council and is on file in the Planning
Department.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the day
,2009.
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
APZ7!)ki~;~7Y
City Att ney's 0 Ice
II
REQUEST:
Alteration and Enlaraement of a Nonconformina Use
III
STEPHEN C.
SWAIN
Agenda Item
February 24, 2009 City Council
Meeting
STAFF PLANNER:
Karen Prochilo
ADDRESS I DESCRIPTION: Property located at 1107 Cedar Point Drive.
GPIN:
24186626280000
ELECTION DISTRICT:
BEACH
SITE SIZE:
19,974 square feet
AICUZ:
65 dB to 70 dB DNL
Sub-Area 3
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
There are two structures located on this site: (1) a two story single-family dwelling built in 1981 and (2) a
1 %-story cottage used as a pool/guest house. City staff could not confirm the actual date the pool/guest
house was built, but based on architecture and related structures in the area, staff concludes the structure
was built around the late 1940's to early 1950's.
The applicant desires to make additions and alterations to the two-story (two bedroom) single-family
dwelling. The applicant's alterations are considered changes to an existing nonconforming use because
there are currently two dwellings on the parcel (single-family house and guest house) and the City Zoning
Ordinance does not permit two single-family dwellings on one lot in R-10 Residential District.
The two story single family dwelling is 3,220 square feet. This symmetrical dwelling was inspired by a
Provincial style of architecture. The use of stucco with a cedar-shake flared mansard roof has somewhat
STEPHEN C. SWAIN
February 24, 2009 City Council Meeting
Page 1
of a French Eclectic feel. The applicant will continue to use similar materials and carry the same
symmetrical design for the proposed addition.
The proposed two-story addition will expand each floor by 750 square feet. The first floor will incorporate
an expansion to the kitchen, a family room as well as a bedroom with bathroom. The second floor
revisions will expand an existing bedroom, as well as add two additional rooms. The total expansion will
be 1,500 square feet. This addition will not encroach into side yard setbacks. The proposed addition will
extend 20 feet to the north leaving a side yard setback of 11'- 9".
LAND USE AND ZONING INFORMATION
EXISTING LAND USE: Single-family dwelling, pool/guest house and pool occupy the site. The site has
residential scale mature shrubs and trees.
SURROUNDING LAND
USE AND ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
· Single-family dwelling / R-1 0 Residential District
· Single-family dwelling / R-10 Residential District
· Across Cedar Point Drive are single-family dwellings / R-10
Residential District
· Single-family dwellings / R-30 Residential District
West:
NATURAL RE:SOURCE AND
CULTURAL F:EATURES:
There are no significant natural resources or cultural features associated
with this site.
IMPACT ON CITY SERVICES
No impacts to City Services.
EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommE~nds approval of this
request subject to the conditions below.
The proposed two-story addition will expand each floor by 750 square feet. The first floor will incorporate
an expansion to the kitchen, a family room as well as a bedroom with bathroom. The second floor
revisions will expand an existing bedroom, as well as add two additional rooms. The total expansion will
be 1,500 square feet. This addition will not encroach into side yard setbacks. The proposed addition will
extend twenty feet to the north leaving a side yard setback of 11'- 9".
STEPHEN C. SWAIN
February 24, 2009 City Council Meeting
Page 2
II
III
Staff concludes that the proposed enlargement is reasonable, will have a minimal impact, and should be
as appropriate to the district as the existing non-conforming use. Approval, therefore, is recommended
with the following conditions.
CONDITIONS
1. The additions to the single-family dwelling shall substantially adhere to the submitted architectural floor
plans entitled "ADDITIONS & ALTERATIONS TO THE SWAIN RESIDENCE 1107 Cedar Point Drive
Virginia Beach First Floor Plan A-1 and Second Floor Plan A-2", dated July 07,2008, and prepared by
Folck West Architects. Said plan has been exhibited to the City of Virginia Beach City Council and is
on file in the Planning Department. Interior room layout may be modified; however, the addition may
not extend beyond the footprint shown on the floor plans.
2. The additions to the single-family dwelling shall substantially adhere to the submitted elevation plans
entitled "ADDITIONS & ALTERATIONS TO THE SWAIN RESIDENCE 1107 Cedar Point Drive Virginia
Beach Front & Rear Elevations A-4 and Side Elevations A-5,", dated July 07,2008, and prepared by
Folck West Architects. Said plan has been exhibited to the City of Virginia Beach City Council and is
on file in the Planning Department.
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.
STEPHEN C. SWAIN
February 24, 2009 City Council Meeting
Page 3
-
-
STEPHEN C. SWAiN
February 24,2009 City Council Meeting
Page 4
II
-.-..------,
-.... '\.
\. '\.
" '
.,.\....,...,.. \,~
..... ~
.~'.-,~.., - -",^-"
, '~
"\'"""',""" "- -.-.11 '
, '}I
...... ~ .
I . ..'.....______....___.._.._ ...~.: ::_......_____ ..___.._.__...1..........
..::;
f;.
"J~"""'" ,
I
I
! ,
1
-'
>;
-~
I
- -1 -.. --=-=--=,,7."
; L,___._
I
i II~
!~
1~1' ,
,~:'",-Li
'....~ II
L-i
..1-..
r '".,"..,,,'~''''
. ,
'". r,
'" ,
,{
f:
~ ~
"
<
'.
i
t
I
,,~
.:,:L
f:
H
III
3
a.
~
II.
~~
t.
dJ
PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR ADDITION
STEPHEN C. SWAIN
February 24, 2009 City Council Meeting
Page 5
It
q!
~
..
~;
II.
Cl
~..~
t
;J;.
PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR ADDITION
STEPHEN C. SWAIN
February 24, 2009 City Council Me~ing
Page 6
\ \
~ -
j ; i i
l
, \ ~, \
, \ 1 \
"",\
\
,
\ \, ~ (\ '~j \
.,
, \ \\
( ,
,. , \
\ \ \
. ; . .
\ :', \ \ , .
..._~ .
. \ ..\
,
\ ,
\, v'\
\\ \
\'\'
~~
...\:
-.
t
\
.
J
\'
;\
\\
\
'(r
\ ("1'
\
,
~C-.
\ .
, .
\
.
\
,
\
,
\\
'. \ {,OOO'
\'. ,.,...."..i
"i ,,,000.
\'~
\
,
, \ 1
t \
. \ '
fA \
\ ~~, i
, ~ ~ ~
l ~ \ \
~\,~;:A~
PROPOSEO fRON. 8< REAR E\.E\JA1\ON
S'TEPHEN C. SWA\t-
February 24, 2009 CitY Council Mee\in'
page
; i
. i
i ", ,~
I
I
,
I
,
I
B
,
I
,
I
I
,
!
- ..; .
1-,
,
I
I
,
~
B
~
.
I
". ....1
025
I
,
~
~
~
~;
z.
2It
~
,
I
,
I
,
I
in
.1
. " 1
, ~
, i(F1
i
I
,
1
I
1
I
!(,.._,
1 \ ...-.,
~
l
,
j
J
,
r
PROPOSED SIDE ELEVATIONS
STEPHEN C. SWAIN
February 24, 2009 City Council Meeting
Rage 8
II
z
o
I I
~
U
I I
......:1
P-4
~
~
cI')
;:::J
t..:)
z
~
o
~
Z
o
u
.
Z
o
Z
III
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
APPLICANT DISCLOSURE
If the applicant is a corporation, partnership. firm bUSiness, or other unincorporated
organization, complete the following.
1. Ust the applicant name followed by the names of ail officers members, trustees,
partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary)
Stephen C. Swain
I 2, List all businesses that have a parent-subsidiary1 or affiliated business entity2
relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary)
lXI Check here If the applicant IS NOT a corporation partnership, firm business or
other unincorporated organization
PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE
Complete this section only if property owner is different from applicant.
If the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business. or other
unincorporated organization, complete the following'
1. List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers members,
trustees, partners. etc. below: (Attach list if necessary)
Stephen C. Swain
2. List all businesses that have a parent-subsidiary 1 or affiliated business entitl
relationship with the applicant (Attach list if necessary)
t1l Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm.
business, or other unincorporated organization.
r~ See next page for footnotes .
Does an official or employee of the City of Virginia Beach have an mterest in the
subject land? Yes _, No X
If yes, what lS the name of the official or employee and the nature of their interest?
/>,on.Coa!ormmg Use AppllCalion
Page 8 of \1
Re\l'sOO 1!3iO?
STEPHEN C. SWAIN
February 24, 2009 City Council Meeting
Page 10
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES
List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect
to thel requested property use, including but not limited to the prOViders of arcMectural
services, real estate services, financial services accounting services, andlegai
services (Attach list if necessary)
P. Scott Folck, AlA, Folck West Architects
1369 Laskin Road, Suite 4
Vh:2:..inia Beach, VA 23451
, "Parent-subsidiary relationship" means '8 relalionship that exists when one
corpo"ation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting
power of another corporation," See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act Va
Code S 2.2-31\>1
;':'Affillated business entity relationship" means "a relationship. other than parent-
subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a controlling ownership
intareHt in the other business entity, (iil a controlling owner in one entity is also a controHing
owner in the other entity. or (iii) there is shared management or control between the business
entities. Factors that should be con sidered in determining the ex istence of an affiliated
busintlSS entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person
own or manage the two entities; there are common or commingled funds or assets; the
businHss entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities.
I reSOUlces or personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship
I between the entities." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code ~
2.2.3101
CERTIFICA TION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate
I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled fer
public heanng I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required SIgn on the sub,ec\ property at
least :)<;1 days pnor to the scheduled publiC heanng according to the Instructions III this package The
undersigned also consents to entry upon me subject property by employees of the Department of
Planning to photograph and vIew the site for purposes of processing and evaiuaMg trus apphcatlofl
~~=~~~?_E' Swain
Print Name
ProperlyOWili(S'Slgnature (if different than app\ica;:;~ Pnnt Name
NOf!~:{"lnf(mrHfig lbB ,A..ppHr'..,tHkJn
PageSd
R"V1Sild 7!J!fJ7
z
o
I C
~
U
I I
~
~
~
.~
CI':J
;::.J
t...::)
Z
~
o
~
Z
o
u
.
Z
o
Z
STEPHEN C. SWAIN
February 24, 2009 City Council Meeting
Page 11
III
'.
.9515
wLT:et/Pebruary 27, 1990
COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS AND CONDITIONS
PROFFERED TO
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
THIS DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS AND CONDITIONS,
made this 27th day of February, 1990 by and among ROBERT M.
STEIN, EDWARD S. STEIN, ARTHUR H. STEIN, BARBARA S. FISCHER
(formerly Barbara S. Feldman) and ROBERT M. STEIN, Fiduciary
under the Last Will and Testament of Jack Stein, Deceased
(collectively "Grantors"), and the CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
("City"), a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of
Virginia:
WIT N E SSE T H :
WHEREAS, the Grantors have initiated an amendment to the
Zoning Map of the City, by petition of the Grantors addressed to
the City, requesting a change in the classification of the
Grantors' property from I-I Light Industrial District to B-2
Community Business District on certain property containing
approximately twenty six and six-tenths (26.6) acres, more or
less, located on the Northwest and Southwest corners of the
intersection of Phoenix Drive and Sabre Street in the Lynnhaven
Borough of the City, more particularly described on Exhibit A
attached hereto ("Property"':
WHEREAS, the City's policy is to provide only for the
orderly development of land for various purposes including light
industrial and limited commercial purposes, through zoning and
ot.her land development legislation;
WHEREAS, the Grantors acknowledge that the two
classifications concerned could be in conflict, but feel that
under given circumstances such classifications can be compatible.
In order to gain permission for the differing use on the
Property, the Grantors recognize the need to protect the
community from possible effects of the zoning change by accepting
the imposition of certain reasonable conditions not generally
applied to the B-2 District but which will govern the use of the
Property in this case;
WHEREAS, the Grantors have voluntarily proffered the
following reasonable conditions in writing prior to the public
hearing held by the City, as a part of the proposed amendment to
the Zoning Map, in addition to the regulations provided for the
B-2 District by the City Zoning Ordinance ("CZO"). Grantors
intend that these conditions relating to the physical development
and operation of the Property be adopted as a part of the
- 35 -
Item V-J.l.c.
PUBLIC HEARING
PLANNING ITEM I 32809 (Continued)
Voting: 11-0
Council Members VotIng Aye:
Albert W. Balko, John A. Baum, Vice Mayor Robert E.
Fentress, Harold Helschober, Barbara M. Henley, Reba
S. McClanan, John O. Moss, Mayor Meyera E.
Oberndorf, Nancy K. Parker, John L. Perry and WIlliam
D. Sess,:>ms, Jr.
Council Members Vc,tlng Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
None
May 14, 1990
II
III
- 34 -
Item V-J.1.c.
PUBLIC HEARING
PLANNING
ITEM # 32809
Attorney Eric A. Hauser, 900 One Columbus Center, Phone: 473-5358, represented
Wal Mart Stores and Parcel A.
Mike Davis, represented Wal Mart Stores, which will occupy Parcel A and advised
approximately 260 jobs will be provided.
John M. Knibb, Vice President Development/Land Sales, Divaris Real Estate,
Suite 602, One Columbus Center, Phone: 497-2113. Mr. Knibb displayed the
landscaping plan for Parcel A. The building will be constructed of split-block
masonry.
Warren L. Tisdale, 1425 Bayberry Place, Chesapeake Phone: 628-556 (W), 424-9669
(H), represented Parcels Band C and the owners of the property
LCDR M. R. Terrel, NAS Oceana, Phone: 433-2408, advised NAS Oceana and U.S.
Navy has WITHDRAWN their OPPOSITION. The summary of major use restrictions and
limitations contained in the agreement between the Stein Family and the
Department of the Navy were distributed to City Council and are hereby made a
part of the record.
Upon motion by Councilman Balko, seconded by Vice Mayor Fentress, City Council
ADOPTED an Ordinance upon application of ROBERT M. STEIN, EDWARD S. STEIN,
ARTHUR H. STEIN and BARBARA S. FISCHER (PARCEL A Only) for a Conditional Zoning
Classification. PARCELS Band C were referred back to the PLANNING COMMISSION.
ORDINANCE UPON APPLICATION OF ROBERT M. STEIN,
EDWARD S. STEIN, ARTHUR H. STEIN AND BARBARA S.
FISCHER FOR A CONDITIONAL ZONING CLASSIFICATION
FROM I-I TO B-2 Z05901283
BE IT HEREBY ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA
Ordinance upon application of Robert M. Stein,
Edward S. Stein, Arthur H. Stein and Barbara S.
Fischer for a Conditional Zoning Classification
from I-I Light Industrial District to B-2 Community
Business District on certain property located at
the northwest intersection of Phoenix Drive and
Sabre Road. The parcel contains 26.63 acres. More
detailed information is available in the Department
of Planning. LYNNHAVEN BOROUGH.
The following condition shall be required:
Agreement and deed restrictions, encompassing the
twelve (12) proffers as presented to City Council on
May 14, 1990, shall be recorded with the Clerk of the
Circuit Court.
This Ordinance shall be effective in accordance with Section 107 (f) of the
Zoning Ordinance.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the
Fourteenth of May, Nineteen Hundred and Ninety.
May 14, 1990
WALMART
Wal-Mart Real Estate Business do
ames A. Cole Es
657 Phoenix Drive
Relevant Information:
· Rose Hall District
· The applicant requests a Modification of Proffers of a 1990 rezoning.
· The 1990 rezoning was tied to a specific plan. The applicant desires
to upgrade the existing building and parking lot; thus, modification
of the 1990 proffers is necessary.
· AICUZ is > 75 and APZ-2.
Evaluation and Recommendation:
· Planning Staff recommended approval
· Planning Commission recommends approval (10-0).
· Consent Agenda.
· No opposition.
II
III '
,{l~~~
,C":-~'" ..~+.~
~t..~. ,"'~~
\:.~ i;]
~~.... ~;/..
..~~~:p'
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: WAL-MART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TRUST, Modification of Conditions,
previously approved by City Council on May 14,1990,657 Phoenix Drive. ROSE
HALL DISTRICT.
MEETING DATE: February 24, 2009
. Background:
The site was rezoned from 1-1 Industrial District to Conditional B-2 Community
Business District by City Council on May 14, 1990. There are twelve proffers with
that rezoning. The applicant desires to modify Proffers 4, 6, and 10 in order to
reduce the number of parking spaces to what is required by the Zoning
Ordinance, and to slightly enlarge and modernize the building and provide more
green space than would otherwise be provided with a building expansion.
. Considerations:
The proposed modification updates the proffered site plan and elevations in
accordance with the current proposal. The proposed expansion includes a
163,000 square foot retail space and garden center. The exterior of the store will
be renovated consistent with Walmart's new style for this region and will include
use of multi-colored tan pre-cast panels, split-face concrete masonry unit (CMU),
weathered and smooth-face shingles, Trespa Meteon@ metal panel system, and
exterior insulation finishing system (EIFS).
Staff concluded that this request to modify proffers to allow the reduction of
parking to the number required by the Zoning Ordinance and to clearly identify
how the site will be redeveloped is acceptable. The original plans provided for
parking far in excess of what the Zoning Ordinance requires. The proposed
reduction in parking and the modification of building elevations and site plan is
not a significant change from the originally approved proposal. Additional
landscaping will also be provided to enhance the site and to act as a buffer to
surrounding uses.
Signage as shown on the submitted elevation appears to be more than what the
Zoning Ordinance allows; however, all signs must be in accordance with the
signage regulations. Staff will ensure the proposed signage meets those
regulations during detailed site plan review.
The Planning Commission placed this item on the consent agenda because the
proposed modifications to the proffers are reasonable and will result in site and
Wal-Mart ReallEstate Business Trust
Page 2 of 2
buildin~1 improvements of a higher quality than what currently exists, and there
was no opposition to the proposal.
. Recommendations:
The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 9-0 to approve
this request as proffered.
. Attachments:
Staff Review
DisclosUlre Statement
Plannin~J Commission Minutes
Location Map
Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends
approval.
Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department ~~
City Manager~ v.. .~ ,
II
III
WAL-MART REAL
ESTATE
BUSINESS TRUST
Agenda Item 2
January 14, 2009 Public Hearing
STAFF PLANNER:
Leslie Bonilla
REQUEST:
Modification of Conditional Chanae of Zonina approved by the City Council on May 14, 1990
ADDRESS I DESCRIPTION: 657 Phoenix Drive
GPIN:
1496387496
ELECTION DISTRICT:
ROSE HALL
SITE SIZE:
15.0 acres
AICUZ:
Greater than 75 dB DNL /
APZ2
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
The Rezoning from 1-1 Industrial District to Conditional B-2
Community Business District was approved by City Council on May 14, 1990. The Conditional Rezoning
has twelve proffers, which are provided on the following page. The applicant desires to modify Proffer 6 in
order to provide parking in accordance with Zoning Ordinance regulations. Currently, Proffer 6 requires
more parking spaces than the ordinance requires. This proposed modification will allow the applicant to
decrease required parking and provide more green space than would otherwise be provided with the
proposed building expansion.
The applicant has also requested modification of Proffer 4 and Proffer 10 to allow an upgrade to the site
and building. The previous approval allowed a 123,000 square foot retail building and identified a future
expansion. The proposed modification updates the proffered site plan and elevations in accordance with
the current proposal. The proposed expansion includes a 163,000 square foot retail space and garden
center. The exterior of the store will be renovated to include multi-colored tan pre-cast panels, split-face
WAL-MART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TRUST
Agenda Item 2
Page 1
concrete masonry unit (CMU) weathered and smooth-face shingles, trespa meteon panel system, and an
exterior insulation finishing system (EIFS).
The May 14,1990 proffers are provided below:
1. The Property shall not be resubdivided to contain less than 15.0 acres. This restriction shall not
preV€int boundary line agreements or resubdivisions with adjacent property owners for the
purposes of resolving dispute property lines or removing encroachments, provided that the
PropHrty contains at least 15.0 acres and all other requirements of the City are satisfied. Any
takinu by, or dedication to, any governmental body which results in the Property containing less
than '15.0 acres shall not be considered a violation of this Proffer.
2. No more than one (1) Primary Structure, as hereafter defined, shall be constructed on the
PropElrty; however, an ancillary building, to be used as a stockroom, may be constructed as a
separate structure, provided that all other requirements of the City are satisfied. For the purposes
of this paragraph a "Primary Structure" shall mean any building containing 500 square feet of floor
area or more, but shall not include unenclosed structures ancillary to the Primary Structure, such
as service station canopies, drive-through windows I aisles and the line (such facilities may have
a small portion enclosed, not to exceed 50 square feet, for the use as an attendant or teller booth
and similar uses).
3. Any buildings on the Property shall not exceed 30 feet in height above the ground building pad.
This height limitation shall not be applicable to: chimneys and smoke stacks; cooling tanks and
towers; flag poles; structures for housing elevators; HV AC equipment; antenna or other
transmitting or receiving devices; ventilating fans or similar equipment required to operate and
maintain any building or other improvement on the Property; or other incidental projections.
4. Any buildings to be constructed on the Property shall be of masonry construction (including, but
not lirnited to, split-stone masonry) and shall be co.nstructed in substantial compliance with the
store rendering entitled "Proto 110 Front Elevation" and dated July 1, 1989, a copy of which has
been contemporaneously delivered to the City with this declaration.
5. The Property shall be landscaped in a manner reasonably consistent with the landscaping of first-
class commercial development in the City, such that the appearance of the Property does not
detract from the appearance of the immediately surrounding properties.
Ther€i shall be an open area fifteen (15) feet in width running along the northern lot line of the
ProPEirty (the "Northern Landscaped Space") and an open area fifteen (15) feet in width along the
eastern boundary of the one-hundred (100) foot drainage easement bisected by the western
(rear) lot line of the Property as set forth on the Site Plan referenced in Proffer 10 below (the
"Western Landscaped Space". (The Western and Northern Landscaped Spaces are hereinafter
collectively referred to as the "Landscaped Space".) The Landscaped Space shall be planted
with the following plants, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Administrator of the City's
Landscape Services Division, at the following locations running along the lot lines within the
Landscaped Space:
a. Wax myrtles - 3 to 4 feet tall at the time of planting, no more than 4 feet apart, measured
from the center of each plant;
b, Potamac Crapemyrtles - 8 to 10 feet tall at the time of planting, no more than 25 feet
apart, measured from the center of each plant;
c. Loblolly Pines - 6 to 8 feet tall at the time of planting, a total of no less than 6 planted at
various locations, in groupings.
WAL-MART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TRUST
Agenda Item 2
Page 2
II
III
No structures, parking or driveways shall be located within the Landscaped Space except that: (i)
driveways or walkways may be installed across the Landscaped Space; and (ii) all or a portion of
the Western Landscaped Space may be developed as a stormwater maintenance system.
The Landscaped Space shall be maintained in accordance with the requirements of Category 4,
of the Landscaping, Screening & Buffering Specifications and standards of the City.
6. Upon and after completion of the improvements on the Property, the Property shall contain at
least 5.5 parking spaces for every 1,000 square feet of floor area in the Primary Structure and
ancillary enclosed structures.
7. All dumpsters, trash receptacles, mechanical equipment and other facilities that are separate
from the Primary Structure shall be suitably screened with fencing, or otherwise enclosed, so that
such facilities are not visible from the Property or streets adjoining the Property.
8. Electrical, Mechanical, HVAC apparatus, equipment or fixture (other than lighting fixtures) located
on the exterior of any building on the Property shall be screened, up to the height of such
apparatus, equipment or fixture, in a manner architecturally compatible with the building and
acceptable to the City.
9. All electrical, telephone and other utility lines servicing buildings or improvements on the Property
shall be underground and shall not be exposed on the exterior of any buildings or improvements
on the Property.
10. The improvements on the Property shall be constructed in substantial conformance with the site
plan entitled "Proposed Site Plan for a Department Store, Virginia beach, Virginia" dated February
23, 1990 by Freeland-Clinkscales & Associates (the "Site Plan") on record with the Planning
Department of the City, Changes to the Site Plan as requested by the City in writing during site
plan review, building permit review and/or construction of the improvements shall be allowed.
11. The Property shall be used exclusively as a retail department store, including a garden shop
department.
12. Sabre Street, as shown on the Site Plan, shall be extended and improved to the eastern edge of
the drainage easement on the western boundary of the Property and shall have sufficient width to
accommodate the two lanes of vehicular traffic in each direction in accordance with state and
local standards.
LAND USE AND ZONING INFORMATION
EXISTING LAND USE: 123,000 square foot discount store (Wal-Mart)
SURROUNDING LAND
USE AND ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
. Vacant land and office buildings /1-1 Industrial District
. Across Sabre Street are vacant land, retail stores, and
industrial office buildings /1-1 Industrial District
. Across Phoenix Drive are retail stores 1 B-2 Community
Business District
. Office buildings 11-1 Industrial District
West:
NATURAL RESOURCE AND
CULTURAL FEATURES:
There are no known significant natural resources or cultural features on
the site.
WAL-MART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TRUST
Agenda Item 2
Page 3
IMPACT ON CITY SERVICES
MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN (MTP) I CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP): Sabre Drive is
a four-lane collector roadway along the south side of this site. Phoenix Drive in front of this request is a two-
lane collector road. There are no CIP roadway projects planned for either of these roadways.
TRAFFIC: Street Name Present
Volume Present Capacity Generated Traffic
Sabre Drive No Counts 20,700 ADT Existing Land Use ~ - 6,890
Available ADT (622 PM peak hour
Phoenix Drive No Counts 9,900 ADT trip-s)
Available Proposed Land Use 3 -
9.131 ADT (824 PM peak
hour trips)
Average Daily Trips
2 as defined by 123,000 square foot free-standing discount store
3 as defined by 163,000 sauare foot free-standina discount store
WATER: This site has an existing 2-inch water meter (ID # 95019854) which may be used or upgraded. There
is a 12-inch City water line in Phoenix Drive. There is a 12-inch City water line in Sabre Street.
SEWER: This site is connected to City sanitary sewer. A hydraulic analysis of Pump Station # 513 and the
sanitary seWElr collection system is required to ensure future flows can be accommodated. There is an 8-inch
City gravity sanitary sewer main in Phoenix Drive. There is a 10-inch City gravity sanitary sewer main in Sabre
Street.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of this
request with the submitted proffers. The proffers are provided below.
EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION
Comprehensive Plan:
The Comprehensive Plan designates this site to be within Strategic Growth Area 9 West Oceana Area of
the City of Virginia Beach. Strategic Growth Areas are designated to absorb most of the city's future
growth, both residential and non-residential and, as such, are planned for more intensive uses than most
other areas of the City.
The West Ocoana Area is generally bounded by London Bridge Road, Lynnhaven Creek and South
Lynnhaven Road. It includes Lynnhaven mall, surrounding retail and office complexes and West Oceana
Industrial Parle All of this area is inside the AICUZ high noise zone. The developable land west of
Lynnhaven Parkway is appropriate for corporate office, retail and other comparable commercial use.
WAL-MART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TRUST
Agenda Item 2
Page 4
II
III ,
Evaluation:
This request to modify proffers to allow the reduction of required parking and to clearly identify how the
site will be renewed is acceptable. The proposed reduction in parking and modification of building
elevation and site plan is not a significant change from the originally approved proposal. Based on the
City's Zoning Ordinance, adequate parking will be provided for the proposed expansion, Additional
landscaping will also be provided to enhance the site and act as a buffer to surrounding uses.
Signage as shown on the submitted elevation appears to be more than what the Zoning Ordinance
allows; however, all signs on-site must be in accordance to the City's signage regulations. Proposed
signage will be reviewed during detailed site plan review.
PROFFERS
The following are proffers submitted by the applicant as part of a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA). The
applicant, consistent with Section 107(h) of the City Zoning Ordinance, has voluntarily submitted these
proffers in an attempt to "offset identified problems to the extent that the proposed rezoning is acceptable,"
(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 4, contained in the Original Proffers, is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as
follows: "PROFFER 4. Any buildings to be constructed on the Property shall be constructed in substantial
conformance with the store rendering entitled "Walmart, Virginia Beach, Virginia # 1688" and dated
September 25, 2008, a copy of which has been contemporaneously delivered to the City with this
declaration; has been exhibited to the City Council; and is on record with the City Planning Department."
PROFFER 2:
Proffer Number 6, contained in the Original Proffers, is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as
follows: "PROFFER 6. Upon and after completion of the improvements on the Property, the off-street
parking provided on the Property shall be in accordance with the requirements set forth under the City of
Virginia Beach Zoning Ordinance, as modified by any variance obtained from the appropriate authority."
PROFFER 3:
Proffer Number 10, contained in the Original Proffers, is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as
follows: "PROFFER 10. The improvements on the Property shall be constructed in substantial conformance
with that site plan entitled "Site Layout Plan, Wal-Mart Store # 1688-06,657 Phoenix Drive, GPIN 1496-38-
7496, District 3 - Rose Hall, Virginia Beach Virginia", prepared by Engineering Services, Inc., and dated
October 30, 2008 (the "Site Plan"), which has been exhibited to the City Council, and is on record with the
Planning Department of the City. Changes to the Site Plan as requested by the City in writing during site
plan review, building permit review and/or construction of the improvements shall be allowed."
PROFFER 4:
All other covenants, restrictions and conditions proffered as part of the Original Proffers shall remain
unchanged and are incorporated herein by reference.
STAFF COMMENTS: The proffers listed above are acceptable, as reducing the required number of parking
for retail establishments over 80,000 square feet is in keeping with the City Zoning Ordinance in regards to
retail design standards and parking regulations. The applicant has proffered a site plan that provides a
WAL-MART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TRUST
Agenda Item 2
Page 5
perimeter Ifmdscape buffer along Phoenix Drive that does not currently exist. The addition of the perimeter
buffer, the reduction of required parking, and upgrades to the exterior of building will ensure the quality of the
proposed building expansion.
The City Attorney's Office has reviewed the proffer agreement dated December 29,2008, and found it to be
legally suffiGient and in acceptable legal form.
NOTE: Furt/ler conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances.
Plans submltted 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.
WAL-MART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TRUST
Agenda Item 2
Page 6
II
AERIAL OF SITE LOCATION
WAL-MART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TRUST
Agenda Item 2
Page 7
{M/};. :)~.)"lr:d ;MfH~'1 J:~NID0d
i:t
~l
"'''''''...''''
..'i.':>fI:>','.'
~
1 _4..
~.
,
<: H,
I>
l
~ 1 .
;;! ~ i
I' . ,
: ~p
l: I" r
PI II I
!; I. t
'i l~ .
f! p~ .
'<::
ft.
~,
$
!:
;:
~
ik~
i!i
:!
'"
0(
'"
...
.-
'"
\:.t~
L:
'"
S-
~
PROPOSED SITE PLAN
WAL-MART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TRtJST
Agenda IteJ'n 2
Page 8
II
~ I ,
III ,
N
-
"-
m
.5
3
00'
""
~'
* ~
'5: ;
.~, v
;; ..
-g
~
;;
PROPOSED BUILDING ELEVATION
WAL-MART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TRUST
Agenda Item 2
Page 9
Modification of Proffers
# DATE DESCRIPTION ACTION
1 5- '14-90 Zoning Change (1-1 to Conditional B-2) Granted
1-25-88 Conditional Use Permit (carwash) Granted
8-8-83 Zoning Change (1-1 to B-2) Withdrawn
2 8-25-92 Zoning Change (1-1 to Conditional B-2) Withdrawn
3 10,.12-87 Conditional Use Permit (hotel/motel) Granted
4 4-13-93 Vacation of a Portion of Variable Width Easement Granted
5 2-13-89 Conditional Use Permit (miniature golf) Granted
6 5-~~5-93 Zoning Change (1-1 to Conditional B-2) Granted
7 8-~~4-04 Zoning Change (1-1 to Conditional B-2) Granted
8 10..27 -98 Street Closure Granted
ZONING HISTORY
WAL-MART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TRUST
Agenda Item 2
Page 10
II
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
APPLICANT DISCLOSURE
If the applicant is a corporation. partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated
organization, complete the following:
1. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers. members. trustees,
partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary)
Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust: Manaqinq Trustee - Eric S. Zorn: Statutory
Trustee - Wilminqton Trust Company; Beneficiary - Wal-Mart Property Co.; Officers-
Please see Attached List
2, List all businesses that have a parent-subsidiary' or affiliated business entity"
relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary)
Wal-Mart Property Co,; Wal-Mart Stores East, LP; WSE Manaqement, LLC; WSE
Investment, LLC; Wal-Mart Stores East, Inc.; Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
o Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation. partnership, firm. business, or
other unincorporated organization.
PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE
Complete this section only if property owner is different from applicant.
If the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other
unincorporated organization, complete the following:
1. List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members,
trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary)
Same as applicant.
2. List all businesses that have a parent-subsidiaryl or affiliated business entit!
relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary)
Same as applicant.
o Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business,
or other unincorporated organization.
, 2
& See next page for footnotes
Does an official or employee of the City of Virginia Beach have an interest in the
subject land?
Yes No X
If yes, what is the name of the official or employee and the nature of their interest?
N/A
Modification of Conditions Apphcabon
Page 100f 11
ReVised 7/3/07
III
Z
<:>
I I
!<
t....'
I I
I ,
~I
ea
~
Z
<:>
I I
F--t
I I
~
Z
<:>
c ~
rT' I
<:>
Z
<:>
I I
~
<:
c ~
I I
rT' I
I I
~
<:>
::;1
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
WAL-MART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TRUST
Agenda Item 2
Page 11
z
<=>
I I
r c
r:;~
I .
I ,
,....
~
CI':)
z
<=>
I I
r I
I I
Q
Z
<=>
c:..;)
r-r t
<=>
Z
c:~~
I I
I I
c)
I I
r'" .
I I
Q
<=>
~
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES
List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect
to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural
services, real estate services, financial services, accounting services, and legal
services: (Attach list if necessary)
Troutman Sanders LLP - Leaal Services
PB2 - Architectural Services
Enaineerina Services, Inc. - Enaineerina Services
1 "Parent-subsidiary relationship" means "a relationship that exists when one
corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the
voting power of another corporation." See State and Local Government Conflict of
Interests Act, Va. Code 9 2.2-3101.
2 "Affiliated business entity relationship" means "a relationship, other than
parent-subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a
controlling ownership interest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in
one entity is also a controlling owner in the other entity, or (iii) there is shared
management or control between the business entities. Factors that should be
considered in determining the existence of an affiliated business entity relationship
include that the same person or substantially the same person own or manage the two
entities; there are common or commingled funds or assets: the business entities share
the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities, resources or
personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship
between the entities." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va.
Code ~ 2.2-3101.
CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate.
I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for
public hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at
least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing according to the instructions In this package. The
undersigned also consents to entry upon the subject property by employees of the Department of
Planning to photograph and view the site for purposes of processing and evaluating this application.
Wal art Real Estate USlness Trust
:- Ll f"11"'., "J.l ,C 'J~ rIP
Prinl Name
Same as applicant.
Pwoenv Uwner'~ SI\!nalUre (If Jifkn:nl than aoo!i(;ml)
Print Name
Modification of Conditions Application
Page 11 ot 11
Flevised 7/3/07
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
WAL-MART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TRUST
Agenda Item 2
Page 12
II
III
UNANIMOllS CONSENT TO ACfIOl'i
BY THE SOLE MANAGING TRUSTEE OF
W AL-MART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TRUST
The und~gned, being the Sole Managing Trustee of Wal-Mart Real Estate Business
Trust (the "Trust"); 8 Delaware statutory trust, pursuant to applicable provisions of the state of its
foonation, the TnJ$t Agreement, and the Bylaws of the Trust hereby consents to and adopts in all
respects the following resolutions:
WHEREAS, the Company has recently completed its fiscal yt:ar ending January 31,
2007, and the Sole Managing Trustee desires to appoint officers for the ensuing year;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that effective immediately, the tollowing
persons shall be elected to the offices set opposite their respective names and shall hold such
offices until their successors shall be duly elected or their earlier resignation and removal, and
any previous officer serving in any of the capacities listed below shall be deemed to have been
removed without cause:
I
I
I
Eri4 S. Zorn President and Chief Executive Officer
Linda M. Dillman Executive Vice President
I .
Chafles M. Holley, Jr. Executive Vice President and Treasurer
M. Brett Biggs Senior Vice President and Assistant Treasurer
J. Rbmm Bray Senior Vice President
An~ony L. Fuller Senior Vice President
I
JOM P. Suarez Senior Vice President
I
StC'fen P. Whaley Senior Vice President and Controller
Clake Babineaux-Fontenot Vice President
I
i
Ami G. Bordelon Vice President
Rici W. Brazile
David L. Bullington
H~ M. Eng
I
Thomas C. Gean
Jeffiey 1. Gearhart
Patrick J. Hamilton
JenDifer May-Brust
Carl R. Muller
Bol:!by 1. Pinkleton
i
}(j~berly K. Saylors
I
Kelly D. Sears
I
Vice President
Vice President
Vice President
Vice President and Assistant StXTetary
Vice President and Secretary
Vice President
Vice President
Vice President
Vice President
Vice President
Vice President
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
WAL-MART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TRUST
Agenda Item 2
Page 13
Tonia R. Smith
Chafles Zinunennan
Micpael J. Spivey
Jolui E. Clarke
Michael E. Gardner
Shannon E. Letts
I
D~el M. Mallory
Robert W. Stoker
1. Chris Callaway
I
George J. Bacso
Fr~ces D. Coberly
James A. Cole
K. Elizabeth Crawford
Geoffrey W. Edwards
Donald R. Etheredge
Nicholas S. Goodner
Samuel A. Guess
MarY Kendall
Judith S. Kim
Richard O. Kinnard
Ad~le E. Lu~as
Richard H. Martin
Amber N, Murphy
i
Antonio M. Ocasio
John T. Okwilbanego
Brad T. Rogers
J. Jeremy Snell
M<<;edith A. Taylor
Gre~ory L. Tesoro
i
Jo~ L. Thompson
I
Ka~y E. Tobey
Mi~hael E. Tomlin
Reginald Webb
I
Sonya L. Webster
I
Rmhona L. West
I
Vice President
Vice President
Vice President and Assistant Secretary
Regional Vice President
Regional Vice President
Regional Vice President
Regional Vice President
Regional Vice President
Assistant Vice President
Assistant St:\",etary
Assistant Secretary
Assistant Secretary
Assistant Secretary
Assistant Secretary
Assistant S~.,.etary
Assistant S~.,.etary
Assistant Secretary
Assistant Secretary
Assistant Secretary
Assistant Secretary
Assistant Secretary
Assistant Secretary
Assistant Secretary
Assistant Secretary
Assistant Secretary
Assistant Secretary
Assistant Secretary
Assistant Secretary
Assistant Secretary
Assistant Secretary
Assistant Secretary
Assistant Secretary
Assistant Secretary
Assistant Secretary
Assistant Secretary
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
WAL-MART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TRUST
Agenda Item 2
Page 14
II
III
Broce E. Wickline
Amber Lee Williams
Elizabeth A. Woodcock
Assistant Secretary
Assistant Secretary
Assistant Secretary
FURTHER RESOLVED, that all acts and transactions of the officers listed above,
which were taken ~r made in good faith and prior to the formal election of such officer that an:
consistent with these resolutions are hereby ratified and approved,
Dated this 9th day of March, 2007.
If,
Ap~rOV8 !':>qal terms only
by ..~
WAl-M ,T. ro\L DEPT.
Date: 3-(1 ';)7;01
Eric S. Zorn
Sole Managing
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
WAL-MART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TRUST
Agenda Item 2
Page 15
DELEGATION OF SIGNATURE AUTHORITY
J, Carl R. M.Uer, being a Vice Presideat of Wal-Mart Stores. Inc.; Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trost;
WaI.Mart TRS. Ltc; WaJ-Mart Realty Compsny; WaJ-Mart Property Company; WaJ..Mart Stores Texas.
LLC; Wal-Mart Stores East, LP; Wal-Mart Louisiana, u..C; WSE MlIJIII&IlIIIeot, u.c ("WSE"); WaJ-
Matt Stores &at, lnc,~ Sam's Real S..... Business Trust; Sam's TRS, LLC; Sam's East, Inc.; Sam's
West, Inc.; Sam's Property Company and Sam's PW, Inc. (coUectively, "ComplUly"). do hereby delegate
to:
Job E. Clarke
Sh..Dota E. Leics
I. Chril C.u.w.y
Bria. E. Hooper
Mldaael E. Gmt.,
authorhy to execute all instmnents requiring execution by the Company, in connection with the purchase,
sale or loasiog of nlel estate or the CODStruc:rion rolated thereto, includiPg but not limited to all cootracts,
checks or demands for money, notes, bonds or other obligations, and DIOrtja&C:S on behalf of the
Company.
Thia delegJd:iOD sIIall supersede and revoke any signature authority previously given tv those listed above.
AIll&:ts ad banS8CliODS of individuals above. which were taken or made in aoad faith aDd prior to the
formal dcJcpti<ln of authority to individual that are ~sjlltcDt with this delegation are hereby ratified and
approved.
:;ubscribcd and sworn before me this .J.1:day of IJItud .2008.
/ dj
.' ,/ "
I....,e :7~;;'-, <- ,. ..J
JI10tary Public ,.
My commission expires:
AI..."
. NOTARY NSE Public
[Notary Seal] ~ R. H~ia\~rt-8nsa5
aenton~n E~1)\les 11~
My C()IfII1I ....,.,.
.- - - ...... ......,...
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
WAL-MART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TRUST
Agenda Item 2
Page 16
III
Item #2
Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust
Modification of Conditions
657 Phoenix Drive
District 3
Rose Hall
January 14, 2009
CONSENT
Joseph Strange: The next matter is agenda item 2. An application ofWal~Mart Real Estate
Business Trust for a Modification of Conditions previously approved by City Council on
May 14, 1990 on property located at 657 Phoenix Drive, District 3, Rose Hall with four
proffers.
RJ. Nutter: Yes sir. Thank you Mr. Strange. Madame Chairperson, for the record, my
name is RJ. Nutter and I'm attorney representing Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust. We
appreciate being on the consent agenda. I would like to tell a little bit about this though. The
owner of the adjacent property is represented by Mr. Bourdon. And they ask that we give
them some elevations of the garden center, which is on the southern portion at this location
right here (pointing to PowerPoint). And we told them that we would provide that to them
between now and City Council. In addition to that, we told them that we would preserve a
stand of trees that acts like a buffer today. It is right in here where we proposed some
parking spaces (pointing to PowerPoint). And we will either relocate those parking spaces or
seek a variance on the spaces because we are fine from a parking perspective. So, we've
agreed to do that, and I wanted to put that on the record and let Mr. Bourdon know. He has
no objection as to us remaining on the consent agenda. Thank you very much.
Joseph Strange: Thank you R.J. Is there any opposition to this matter being placed on the
consent agenda? The Chairman has asked Gene Crabtree to review this item.
Eugene Crabtree: Actually, RJ. has just about said everything that I could tell you as to why
we put it on the consent agenda. The parking was one of the issues here. Wal-Mart wants to
expand the store to increase the inside of the store and to opening up. I think into making it
more of a super store than what it is now. The garden center will be improved. The
elevations did not show the garden center as being covered, however, I understand that it is
going to be covered and that the stand of shrubbery and landscaping along Sabre Road will
be left standing and other parking spaces will probably be removed. By doing this, this will
actually bring the garden center and that area aesthetically into line with the other garden
centers as we required in the City of Virginia Beach by other stores and other retail outlets
that have garden centers. The parking lot itself, there is enough parking there to last forever.
If they filled up that entire parking lot, the store could not hold the people. There are enough
parking spaces, so that is a non issue. And aesthetically the building is going to be improved
and made to look better than what it does now. And due to these factors, we put it on the
consent agenda.
Item #2
Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust
Page 2
Joseph Strange: Thank you Gene. Madame Chair, I will make a motion to approve agenda
item 2.
Janice Anderson: A motion by Joe Strange and a second by Gene Crabtree.
AYE 9 NAY 0 ABSO
ANDERSON AYE
BERNAS AYE
CRABTREE AYE
HENLEY AYE
HORSLEY
KA TSIAS AYE
LIV AS AYE
REDMOND AYE
RUSSO AYE
STRANGE AYE
ABSENT 1
ABSENT
Ed Weeden: By a vote of9-0, the Board has approved item 2 for consent.
II
III
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE
In Reply Refer To Our File No, DF-7293
FROM:
DATE: February 9, 2009
LeSlie~e~ DEPT: City Attorney
B. Kay Wilso __ DEPT: City Attorney
TO:
RE: Conditional Zoning Application; Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust
The above-referenced conditional zoning application is scheduled to be heard by the
City Council on February 24,2009. I have reviewed the subject proffer agreement, dated
December 8,2008 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/bm
Enclosure
cc: Kathle~ssen
Prepared by:
Troutman Sanders LLP
222 Central Park Avenue, Suite 2000
Virginia Beach, Virginia 23462
MODIFICATION OF
COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS AND CONDITIONS PROFFERED TO CITY OF
VIRGINIA BEACH
THIS MODIFICATION OF COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS AND CONDITIONS
~ROFFERED TO CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, made this J!J day of
no( r i" j) ~b", r , 2002L, between W AL-MART REAL EST ATE BUSINESS TRUST,
a Delaware business trust ("Grantor") and the CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, a municipal
corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia ("Grantee");
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Grantor is the owner of the real property described on Exhibit A attached
hereto (the "Property"), which Property is currently zoned Conditional B-2, and is subject to certain
recorded covenants, restrictions, and conditions; and
WHEREAS, in April of 1990, Grantor's predecessors in interest (Robert M. Stein; Edward
S. Stein; Arthur H. Stein; Barbara S. Fischer; and Robert M. Stein (fiduciary under the Will and
Testament of Jal:;k Stein, deceased) proffered certain covenants, restrictions, and conditions as part
of a conditional rezoning, as set forth in the "Covenants, Restrictions and Conditions Proffered to
City of Virginia Beach", dated April 3, 1990, and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit
Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia (the "Clerk's Office") in Deed Book 2911 at page 654
(the "Original Proffers"); and
WHER}:AS, Grantor desires to develop the Property in a manner that differs from the
terms specified in the Original Proffers; and
WHERl~AS, Grantor desires to amend and modify three (3) of the covenants, restrictions,
and conditions set forth in the Original Proffers; and
WHERl~AS, the conditions set forth in the Original Proffers may only be amended or
varied by written instrument recorded in the Clerk's Office and executed by the record owner of the
Property, provided that said instrument is consented to by the Grantee in writing as evidenced by a
certified copy of an ordinance or resolution adopted by the governing body of the Grantee, after a
public hearing properly advertised pursuant to Section 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia, 1950 (as
amended), which said ordinance or resolution shall be recorded along with the amendment as
conclusive evidence of such consent.
GPIN: 1496-38-7496-0000
II
Ii I
NOW, THEREFORE, the Grantor for itself, its successors, assigns, grantees, and other
successors in title or interest, voluntarily and without any requirement by or extraction from the
Crrantee 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 the terms of this declaration shall
constitute covenants running with the said Property, which shall be binding upon the Property and
upon all parties and persons claiming under or through the Grantor, its heirs, personal
representatives, assigns, grantees and other successors in interest or title, namely:
1. Proffer Number 4, contained in the Original Proffers, is hereby amended and
restated in its entirety as follows:
"PROFFER 4. Any buildings to be constructed on the Property shall be constructed
in substantial conformance with the store rendering entitled "Walmart, Virginia Beach, Virginia #
1688" and dated September 25, 2008, a copy of which has been contemporaneously delivered to the
City with this declaration; has been exhibited to the City Council; and is on record with the City
Planning Department."
2. Proffer Number 6, contained in the Original Proffers, is hereby amended and
restated in its entirety as follows:
"PROFFER 6. Upon and after completion of the improvements on the Property, the
off-street parking provided on the Property shall be in accordance with the requirements set forth
under the City of Virginia Beach Zoning Ordinance, as modified by any variance obtained from the
appropriate authority."
3. Proffer Number 10, contained in the Original Proffers, is hereby amended and
restated in its entirety as follows:
"PROFFER 10. The improvements on the Property shall be constructed in
substantial conformance with that site plan entitled "Site Layout Plan, Wal-Mart Store # 1688-06,
657 Phoenix Drive, GPIN 1496-38-7496, District 3 - Rose Hall, Virginia Beach Virginia",
prepared by Engineering Services, Inc., and dated October 30, 2008 (the "Site Plan"), which has
been exhibited to the City Council, and is on record with the Planning Department of the City.
Changes to the Site Plan as requested by the City in writing during site plan review, building permit
review and/or construction of the improvements shall be allowed."
4. All other covenants, restrictions and conditions proffered as part of the Original
Proffers shall remain unchanged and are incorporated herein by reference.
All references herein to zoning districts and to regulations applicable thereto refer to the
City Zoning Ordinance of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in force as of the date the
modification of proffered covenants, restrictions and conditions is approved by the Grantee.
Page 2
The covenants, restrictions and conditions set forth above, having been proffered by the
Grantor and allowed and accepted by the Grantee, shall continue in full force and effect until a
subsequent amendment changes the zoning on the Property covered by such conditions; provided,
however, that such conditions shall continue despite a subsequent amendment if the subsequent
amendment is part of the comprehensive implementation of a new or substantially revised zoning
ordinance, unless, notwithstanding the foregoing, these conditions are amended or varied by written
instrument recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach,
Virginia and ex(~cuted by the record owner of the subject Property at the time of recordation of such
instrument; provided further that said instrument is consented to by the Grantee in writing as
evidenced by a certified copy of an ordinance or resolution adopted by the governing body of the
Grantee, after a public hearing before the Grantee advertised pursuant to the provisions of the Code
of Virginia, SeC1L1.0n 15.2-2204, which said ordinance or resolution shall be recorded along with said
instrument as conclusive evidence of such consent.
The Grantor covenants and agrees that (1) the Zoning Administrator of the City of Virginia
Beach, Virginia shall be vested with all necessary authority on behalf of the governing body of the
City of Virginia Beach, Virginia to administer and enforce the foregoing conditions, including (i)
the ordering in writing of the remedying of any noncompliance with such conditions, and (ii) the
bringing of legal action or suit to ensure compliance with such conditions, including mandatory or
prohibitory injunction, abatement, damages or other appropriate action, suit or proceedings; (2) the
failure to meet all conditions shall constitute cause to deny the issuance of any of the required
building or occupancy permits as may be appropriate; (3) if aggrieved by any decision of the Zoning
Administrator made pursuant to the provisions of the City Code, the Zoning Ordinance or this
Agreement, the Grantor shall petition to the governing body for the review thereof prior to
instituting proceedings in court; and (4) the Zoning Map show by an appropriate symbol on the map
the existence of conditions attaching to the zoning of the Subject Property on the map and that the
ordinance and the conditions may be made readily available and accessible for public inspection in
the office of the Zoning Administrator and in the Planning Department and that they shall be
recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia and
indexed in the name of the Grantor and Grantee.
[Remainder of page intentionally left blank. Separate signature page to follow.]
Page 3
II III
W AL-MART REAL EST A TE BUSINESS
TRUST, a Delaware business trust:
By. km~\\e~
Title: \/1 (.;2/ p{'(),.,;,j,: 1\+
STATE/€OMMONV/EALW OF
...cfP(/COUNTY OF ~~/ Y\'\'OI\
(-\ r kL-. -ri. C-L, <'~
. to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was sworn to and acknowledged before me this ,'Y7 day of
})Nf nIb 2008, by C' {' r \ mu 1\ (J r . on behalf ofWal-Mart Real Estate
Business Trust.
Witness my hand and official stamp or seal this.ilL day otJ),e-,~,el:nhrf2008.
,4<'{(t/7:t, '1A; ,~
N ary blic
(SEAL)
My Commission Expires:
t1....A KJI -.. I -. ----..."
; .-.-.-- KATHY TYER \
\NOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF AR. KA. N SAS
BENTON COUNTY
My Commission Expires 10-19-2016
Commission # 1235!~OJL~___
__..~~"' .. 44UP~
Registration Number:
Page 4
EXHIBIT A
ALL THAT certain lot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings and improvements thereon and
appurtenances thereunto belonging, lying situate and being in the Lynnhaven Borough of the
City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, being known, numbered and designated as Parcel 7, as shown
and designated on the plat entitled "SUBDIVISION & ROADWAY DEDICATION PLAT OF
PARCEL 4, M.B. 160, PG. 31, D.B. 1944, PG. 449, D.B. 2717, PG. 1034, FOR ROBERT M.
STEIN, ET AL, OCEANA WEST INDUSTRIAL PARK, L YNNHA VEN BOROUGH,
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA" dated June 26, 1990, and last revised August 8, 1990, made by
Langley and McDonald, P.C., which said plat is duly recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit
Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Map Book 207, at page 79, reference to which
plat is hereby made for a more particular description of the property conveyed hereby.
AND BEING a portion of the same property conveyed to Wal-Mart Real Estate Trust deed from
Wal-Mart Stores Inc. dated October 31, 1996, and recorded October 16, 1997, in Deed Book
3799, page 1191, among the land records of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia.
371123
Page 5
" I
RE-BIRTH INTERNATIONAL MINISTRIES
Relevant Information:
· Kempsville District
· Applicant requests use of an existing vacant office-warehouse
building for a church.
· Exterior of building will be upgraded and interior renovated to meet
Building and Fire codes for this use.
· AICUZ is Less than 65.
Evaluation and Recommendation:
· Planning Staff recommended approval
· Planning Commission recommends approval (10-0).
· Consent Agenda.
· No opposition.
II
III I
,
..a;;<.z~.."
r5"-~~'" ......~~',
[,J' . \'ti1
(t:{ ,. \"
(~ ~ i~
<,,~, "'- If)
~~ ~y
.~~..
""
"
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
~
ITEM: RE-BIRTH INTERNATIONAL MINISTRIES, Conditional Use Permit (church),
5249 Challedon Drive. KEMPSVILLE DISTRICT.
MEETING DATE: February 24, 2009
. Background:
The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit to allow use of the site for a
church on property zoned B-2 Community Business District. The church
proposes to occupy an existing 6,544 square foot office building on the property.
The site is zoned B-2 Community Business District.
. Considerations:
The church plans to upgrade the exterior of the existing building, finished in
Exterior Insulating Finish System (EIFS), and installing a new canvas awning
above an enhanced relocated entrance. The proposed modifications to the
building will provide this dated faCiade a much needed update. The applicant has
been working with the Building Official's Office to ensure compliance with the all
requirements of the building codes. Early discussions with the Building Official
indicate that the improvements, both interior and exterior, bring this building
toward compliance. A final determination will be made during the review of the
construction plans, which are typically submitted after the Conditional Use Permit
is approved.
The application states that along with the church, a small office and other rooms
for Bible study, outreach, and church support activities are planned within the
building. The current application is for a 50-member church and there is more
than enough parking on-site to accommodate this request, as the City of Virginia
Beach Zoning Ordinance requires at least one (1) parking space for every five
seats in the sanctuary. As this parking lot has only 15 parking spaces, seating
would be limited to 75. As with most every church, the applicant has indicated
the church's desire to grow past its current membership and beyond the 75 limit
due to the number of parking spaces on this site. It is the church's plan that any
overflow parking could utilize the adjacent property's parking lot. Staff has
received letters from two (2) property owners in the cul-de-sac stating that up to
54 parking spaces are available for the church's use on Sundays. This addition of
parking to 70 spaces total, allows the church to grow to the 200 seats in the
sanctuary that is depicted on the provided interior plan. Staff is supportive of this
parking arrangement to allow up to 200 seats in the sanctuary, as this option has
Re-Birth International Ministries
Page 2 of 2
been utilized by other churches in the past. A caveat to this, however, is that the
final occupancy load will be set by the Fire Marshall and the Building Official's
Office. This number for final occupancy will be determined during building plan
review.
The Plalnning Commission placed this item on the consent agenda because the
use is compatible to the surrounding area, the applicant is upgrading the building
to update its exterior appearance and bring the interior into compliance with
current code requirements, and there was no opposition.
. Recommendations:
The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 9-0 to approve
this request with the following conditions:
1. Within one (1) year from the date of approval of this Conditional Use Permit,
the Ghurch shall construct the improvements depicted on the artist's rendering
entitled, "Exterior Renovation Concept: RE-Birth International Ministries,"
dated December 11, 2008, prepared by Barnes Design Group, P.C., which
has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file in the
Dep.artment of Planning.
2. A CHrtificate of Occupancy shall be obtained from the Building Official's Office
prior to occupancy.
3. Overflow parking may be accommodated on neighboring parcels subject to
the written agreements provided with the Conditional Use Permit application
and on file with the Planning Department. While said overflow parking
provides the capability for the church to expand beyond the 75 attendees
permitted by the number of on-site parking spaces, the ultimate maximum
number of attendees shall be limited to the final occupancy load as
determined by the Building Official.
4. Stre1etscape landscaping, as described in the Landscaping Guide, City of
Virginia Beach, December 2002, shall be installed along Challedon Drive
where deemed appropriate by City staff, to aid in screening vehicles from the
right-of-way.
. Attachments:
Staff Review
Disclosure Statement
Planning Commission Minutes
Location Map
Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends
approval.
Submitting De,)artmentlAgency: Planning Department
CItyManage~S k I ~~
II
CUP for ClllIrch
REQUEST:
Conditional Use Permit for a church
ADDRESS I DESCRIPTION: 5249 Challedon Drive
III
RE-BIRTH
INTERNATIONAL
MINISTRIES
Agenda Item 1
January 14, 2009 Public Hearing
STAFF PLANNER:
Carolyn A. K. Smith
GPIN:
14665827010000
ELECTION DISTRICT:
KEMPSVILLE
SITE SIZE:
13,750 square feet
AICUZ:
Less than 65 dB DNL
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit to allow use
of the site for a 50 member church on property zoned B-2
Community Business District. The church proposes to occupy an existing 6,544 square foot office building
on the property. The application states that along with the church, a small office and other rooms for
Bible study, outreach, and church support activities are planned within the building. The church plans to
upgrade the exterior of the building by adding a new "bump out" addition, finished in Exterior Insulating
Finish System (EIFS), and a new canvas awning above a relocated entrance.
LAND USE AND ZONING INFORMATION
. Challedon Drive
. Office I B-2 Community Business District
. Elizabeth River
. Single-family dwellings I R-10 Residential District
EXISTING LAND USE: Office building
SURROUNDING LAND
USE AND ZONING:
North:
South:
RE-BIRTH INTERNATIONAL
Agenda Item 1
Page 1
East:
. Trinity Christian Fellowship Church (CUP, 2002) I B-2
Community Business District
. Office I B-2 Community Business District
West:
NATURAL RESOURCE AND
CULTURAL FEATURES:
The site is within the Chesapeake Bay watershed. The rear of the
property is adjacent to the Eastern Branch of the Elizabeth River and a
small portion of the site is within the 100 year floodplain. As no new
impervious surfaces are proposed, additional review by City staff is not
required. There do not appear to be any significant cultural features on
this site.
IMPACT ON CITY SERVICES
MASTER 'TRANSPORTATION PLAN (MTP) I CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP):
Challedon Drive is a two-lane undivided collector. It is not designated on the Master Transportation Plan
nor is any upgrade to this facility planned.
TRAFFIC: Street Name Present Present Capacity Generated Traffic
Volume
Challedon Drive No Data 9,900 ADT 1 (Level of Existing Land Use ~ -
Available Service "D") 150 ADT
Proposed Land Use 3 -
Weekday 20 ADT
Sunday 97 ADT
Average Dally Tnps
2 as defined by a 6,500 square foot office building
3 as defined by a 6,500 square foot church
WATER: The~re is an eight-inch water main in Challedon Drive. This site has an existing meter that may be
used.
SEWER: The're is an eight-inch sanitary sewer main in Challedon Drive. This site is connected to City sewer.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of this
request with the conditions below.
EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION
Comprehensive Plan:
The Comprehensive Plan designates this site as part of the Primary Residential Area. The land use
planning policies and principles for the Primary Residential Area focus on preserving and protecting the
overall character, economic value and aesthetic quality of the stable neighborhoods located in this area.
In a general sense, the established type, size, and relationship of land use, both residential and non-
RE-BIRTH INTERNATIONAL
Agenda Item 1
Page 2
II
III
residential, located in and around these neighborhoods should serve as a guide when considering future
development.
Evaluation:
The church proposes to occupy an existing 6,500 square foot, two-story building on the property. The
church plans to upgrade the exterior of the building by adding a new EIFS "bump out" and a new canvas
awning above the relocated entrance. The proposed modifications to the building will provide this dated
fayade a much needed update. The applicant has been working with the Building Official's Office to
ensure compliance with the all requirements of the building codes. It is always a concern when a building
transitions to an assembly use that all required improvements related to fire safety and Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA) regulations can be met. Early discussions with the Building Official indicate that the
improvements, both interior and exterior, bring this building towards compliance. A final determination will
be made during the review of the construction plans, which are typically submitted after the Conditional
Use Permit is approved.
The current application is for a 50-member church and there is more than enough parking on-site to
accommodate this request, as the City of Virginia Beach Zoning Ordinance requires at least one (1)
parking space for every five seats in the sanctuary. As this parking lot has only 15 parking spaces,
seating would be limited to 75. As with most every church, the applicant has indicated the church's desire
to grow past its current membership and beyond the 75 limit due to the number of parking spaces on this
site. It is the church's plan that any overflow parking could utilize the adjacent property's parking lot. Staff
has received letters from two (2) property owners in the cul-de-sac stating that up to 54 parking spaces
are available for the church's use on Sundays. This addition of parking to 70 spaces total, allows the
church to grow to the 200 seats in the sanctuary that is depicted on the provided interior plan. Staff is
supportive of this parking arrangement to allow up to 200 seats in the sanctuary, as this option has been
utilized by other churches in the past, with, however, a caveat that the final occupancy load will be set by
the Fire Marshall and the Building Official's Office. Staff recommends a condition that explicitly states that
the overflow parking allows the church to grow beyond the current parking situation of 75 members, but
that it will be the determination of the Building Official's Office as to the final occupancy load. This number
for final occupancy will be determined during building plan review.
Staff recommends approval of the request, subject to the conditions below.
CONDITIONS
1. Within one (1) year from the date of approval of this Conditional Use Permit, the church shall construct
the improvements depicted on the artist's rendering entitled, "Exterior Renovation Concept: RE-Birth
International Ministries," dated December 11, 2008, prepared by Barnes Design Group, P.C., which
has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file in the Department of Planning.
2. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained from the Building Official's Office prior to occupancy.
3. Overflow parking may be accommodated on neighboring parcels subject to the written agreements
provided with the Conditional Use Permit application and on file with the Planning Department. While
said overflow parking provides the capability for the church to expand beyond the 75 attendees
permitted by the number of on-site parking spaces, the ultimate maximum number of attendees shall
be limited to the final occupancy load as determined by the Building Official.
4. Streetscape landscaping, as described in the Landscaping Guide, City of Virginia Beach, December
2002, shall be installed along Challedon Drive where deemed appropriate by City staff, to aid in
RE-BIRTH INTERNATIONAL
Agenda Item 1
Page 3
scrEiening vehicles tram the right-at-way.
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
Departmenf' for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design
(CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site.
RE-BIRTH INTERNATIONAL
Agenda Item 1
Page 4
III
AERIAL OF SITE LoeA TION
RE-BIRTH INTERNATIONAL
Agenda Item 1
Page 5
CI)
QJ
.-
a..
~
CI)
.-
c:
.-
~
"i
c:
o
".P
res ' I
o E
l!
l~ ~ ~ /'
)&$Jf ''',
w ~ i "'"
~:;t :>
.\ .
,
'\,
- ..'\'~. .~....
. -,
~'-' " :,
.f '" ~
51 u if~~ ~
t ~Ui;!i
~: ~ ~lIil;f
~.i~ l.To
/"- . " lIB
;. --~,~~>~:. lll~
I //~~ .~~..~\ ;',:. if ~~
/ / '= ::1 ~!nl
// --~ I I S ~! III i
.~ ~~ \ II~: 0111111
I I \ kU!
Ir-~--~-ffl ~
I I 'i;
o~
"Ill
No-
~~cO 1'=
m!~ &16 S
iD..
tl3
~ ~z 2Jl
~!5 i I
"
1:
L
~, {
PROPOSED SITE PLAN
RE-BIRTH INTERNATIONAL
Agenda Itern 1
Page 6
\ \
t "6 0
r:. .:
.: 0 4(
0 tA :> 0
J: -:;: Q) " S
0 .- ~ .., -
"t:. -a :1< -
r:. ..,
Ci ~
., ... -C "
... t \
, . ;<
'1 """ i ~
'" .
,. - .. ,- - ,
PROPOSEO EX1'ER10R
fACAOE
RE-B\R1H \N1ERNA1\ONAL
Agenda \tem 1
page 1
1; u
E: .:
.:
J~ en ::> .
CIJ ;; 0 "
.c .. ;;
c:, .- ~
t J:: z
t: - ..,
ii3 en ,) ;;;
..- - <( ~
>, cu c O:i:
,.' . -5 ~
W .- .- ~
t: ~ ,) ..
DC: " :i
:. -- >
1).'-'--
~ ~-'-'
".
~
;;3
t
~
'"
~
o
t:i
.
1
III
~
~
.
"
~
~
z
5
...
'"
o
~
a
z
o
u
:1
PROPOSED INTERIOR
LAYOUT
RE-BIRTH INTERNATIONAL
Agenda Item 1
Page 8
II
III
T~SO~O
Corpora:'tJ..o:n.
5250 Challedon Drive, Virginia'Beach, Virg'nia 23462
f':10nc (757) 516-8491 . ~To~o,cCorD cem . F-AX (757) 518-0589
-----~. .
--..---.-
De~ernr.p.i ~I ~:' '05
Mr R6'Jina!d ". Dobbs, Senior Pastor
RE.5ir!'l 1.'1~':!;T'31Ional Ministries
524S C,,":(::,;:;I Drive
Virglni;! Heach. VA 23462
,Dear Mr Deoi)us;
We an. p!e85ed 10 al!ow your membership to utilize our parking area during your o\IO~hip
serV,Ct;', "t .' ~,; 5 Chailedon Drive We agree, good neighbors are a bleSSing anc should work
together whenever possible.
Please lell~S know if there is,anything else we can do to advance your success We trust your
Ministry will ~EJ comfortable in your new location,
Sinl.." ,',; ~ '
iJr./t(~,r'
Denn;:, r c;'lt:'2rt
PrE;S.c: ';
-- ---. ~ .------..-...------- -. - - -- --- .-.- _._-~~
,~ :~, ~l ':. f Hue T ION
DESIGN-BUILD
ENVIRON1,iENTAL
Morohead C ,ty
/:52-726-2532
Charleslon. SC
8~J-216-2616
LETTER FOR SHARED
PARKING
RE-BIRTH INTERNATIONAL
Agenda Item 1
Page 9
/\.d\'wltage 'Heat lug and COO(illg, cIlle.
5253.;\ Ch~"~jcn Dri., V"glria BeJel" VA 2JH1.6J 18
757.'i99.9735 fax 757.....99.9734
r-.:: ~:3:~ Llr:.~"~e f'... 2'4C1B y'" :lUte :"I[C'fll"o! ~ V(~Q7..t91a'"
f),:cemkr ". ':\-08
Reginald K. ['l,hbs, Senior Pastor
RE-Rirt 1lr\t,!",-~tio:lal Ministries
5245 G~"I:.:J',l; Drive
Virginia D~ch. V A 23462
MI' Dobbs,
\V:: \\'('llid be happy to allow your congregation to use our parking spaces U: necessary
dluing >')~i: services.
SiTlcerel:'
~~/j -? ~/
j ,- .;;1-"--
Neil Zerb::
Presidel1~
LETTER FOR SHARED
PARKING
RE-BIRTH INTERNATIONAL
Agenda Item 1
Page 10
II
III
1 1 0/08/02 CUP (church Granted
2 02/13/03 CUP (church Granted
ZONING HISTORY
RE-BIRTH INTERNATIONAL
Agenda Item 1
Page 11
!OISCLOSURESTATEMENT
I
APPLICANT DISCLOSURE
If the applicant is a corporation, partnership, firm. business, or other unincorporated
organization, complete the following:
1. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers. members, trustees.
partn\3rs. etc. below: (Attach list if necessary)
RE-BIRTI-IINTERNATIONAL MINISTRIES. REGINALD K, DOBBS SENIOR PASTOR, ERICA
DOBBS CO-PASTOR. TRUSTEES REGINALD K. DOBBS, ERICA DOBBS, AND JENITA MYERS
2. List all businesses that have a parent-subsidiaryl or affiliated business entity'!
relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary)
o Checll here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm. business, or
other unincorporated organization.
PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE
CompletE! this section only if property owner is different from applicant.
If the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other
unincorporated organization, complete the following:
1. List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members,
trustelas, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary)
PHARELL WILLIAMS
2. List all businesses that have a parent-subsidiaryl or affiliated business entity'!
relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary)
o Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm,
business, or other unincorporated organization.
1 & 2 See next page for footnotes
Does an official or employee of the City of Virginia Beach have an interest in the
subject land? Yes _ No ~
If yes, what is the name of the official or employee and the nature of their interest?
Conditional Use Pennit Application
Page 9 of 10
Revised 7/312007
~
I I
5
::3
~
F-t
~
8:
~
~
~
o
I I
F-t
I I
~
U
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
RE-BIRTH INTERNATIONAL
Agenda Item 1
Page 12
II
~
I .
~
u
~
f-c
~
8:
~
CI"':)
~
~
o
, I
H
~
z
o
u
III
J
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ij
ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES
List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect
to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural
services, real estate services, financial services, accounting services, and legal
services: (Attach list if necessary)
I\/iSA' .J
, VI- \ t
~ONE K~OVi~
l/'
I .Parent-subsidiary relationship' means "s relationship that exists when one
corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessIng more than 50 percent of the voting
power of another corporation." See State and local Government Conflic:t of Interests Act, Va,
Code ~ 2.2-3101.
I "Afftllated business entity relationship. means "a relationship. other than parent-
subsidiary relatlontthlp, that exists when (l) one bus/neM entity has a control&ng ownership
interest In the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in one entity Is also 8 controlHng
owner In the other entity, or (Iii) there is shared management or control between the business
entitles. Factors that should be considered In determining the elCistence of an affiliated
bualnea.e entity relationship Include that the same person or substantially the eame person
own or manage the two entities; there are common or commingled funds or aSlels; the
business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwiae share activities,
resources or personnel on a regular basis; or there Is otherwise I close working relationship
between the entities." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code 5
2.2-3101.
CERTIFICA nON: I certify thet the information contained herein Is true and accurate.
I understand lhal. upon receipt of noliflc;ation (postctrd) th.t the epplieation has been scheduled lor
public h~, responsible for obtaining and posting the reqUired sign on the sUbject property at
=ea ~ days prior 0 the BCheduled pubHc hearing ICCOrding 10 the inslluctlons In this package. The
Igned also nsenls to entry upon the subject property by employees of the Department of
I Iannlng to ~~ purpoaes of processing and evaluating this appHcallon,
REGINALD K. DOBBS
Pri t Name
L-J1/,' I{,'o.h^-,
.I"
Condlllonal Ue POlIIlit AppllClltion
Page 10 of 10
Revised '71312001
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
RE-BIRTH INTERNATIONAL
Agenda Item 1
Page 13
Item # 1
Re-Birth International Ministries
Conditional Use Permit
5249 Challedon Drive
District 2
Kempsville
January 14,2009
CONSENT
Janice Anderson: The next portion of our agenda is the consent agenda. That will be handled
by our Vice Cha!lr, Joe Strange.
Joseph Strange: Okay. Thank you. This afternoon we have seven (7) items on the consent
agenda. The first matter is agenda item 1, Re-Birth International Ministries. An application
for a Conditional Use Permit for a church on property located at 5249 Challedon Drive,
District 2, Kempsville with four conditions.
Janice Anderson: Is there a representative for Re-Birth? Pastor Dobbs please come forward.
Thank you.
Joseph Strange: Please state your name please.
Pastor Reginald Dobbs: Reginald K. Dobbs.
Joseph Strange: Are the conditions acceptable?
Pastor Reginald Dobbs: Yes sir. They are.
Joseph Strange: Thank you very much. Is there any opposition to this matter being placed
on the consent agenda? The Chair has asked Henry Livas to review this item.
Henry Livas: The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit to allow use of the site for a
50 member church on property zoned B-2 Community Business District. The church
proposes to occupy an existing 6,544 square foot, two-story office building on the property.
The applicant states that along with the church, a small office and other rooms for Bible
study, outreach, ~md church support activities are planned within the building. The church
will eventually like to expand to 200 members. The church has also submitted letters from
adjacent property owners supporting that type of expansion. However, the following final
occupancy load below will be determined by the Fire Marshall and the Building Official's
Office. Since the:re were no objections we recommend approval of the requested Conditional
Use Permit and have placed it on our consent agenda.
Joseph Strange: Thank you Henry. Madame Chair, I will make a motion to approve agenda
item 1.
" I
Item # 1
Re-Birth International Ministries
Page 2
Janice Anderson: A motion by Joe Strange and a second by Gene Crabtree.
AYE 9 NAY 0 ABSO
ANDERSON AYE
BERNAS AYE
CRABTREE AYE
HENLEY AYE
HORSLEY
KA TSIAS AYE
LIV AS AYE
REDMOND AYE
RUSSO AYE
STRANGE AYE
ABSENT 1
ABSENT
Ed Weeden: By a vote of 9-0, the Board has approved item 1 for consent.
II
III
CRESCENT COMMUNITY CENTER
MaM:!.. ~-;'~a]e .crelscent Communitv Center
~~')~ ~ ~'\]K~~~~\. "
~~ ~:\ ~ ~ ~Ol~ '
~. ~ ~ ~'lJ ~ l~~~ ~~,
, \ ~~"')li..'lV ~~ ~T--l'" ~~~~
~ S~ ~. · It ~~~~~>.:
~~ " ~~~. ~ ~f ~ rtln.>:. ~
_ ~ - ~ x l\"~"'~
_ U ",-""l r.>lI"11." ~ ~~,~
_ I.~ ,~ ~ ~~~ ' ~ '~:l ~r~
~ _ \J ,I ~ ~ ~ '~~ ~
,\ ~Y4( \~ ~
~~\f~ -: ~ '\J~i~~\~~~~ ~\-~
tbJ · )~.f ~y;"" ~~ ~~>>\
~ F ~ ~~ ~~i~~~\
cUP for Religous Use (church)
Relevant Information:
· Rose Hall District
. Conditional Use Permit for a church within an existing office
building. Building is located in a retail commercial strip center.
. The hours for the church will be Monday through Friday from 10:00
a.m. until 8:00 p.m. Saturday and Sunday, the office will be open
from 1 :00 p.m. until 5:00 p.m. During the week, there will be between
three and five volunteer church members in the office.
. Building will be renovated to meet Building and Fire Code for this
use.
· AICUZ is 65-70 (Sub-Area 3).
Evaluation and Recommendation:
· Planning Staff recommended approval
. Planning Commission recommends approval (10-0).
· Consent Agenda.
· No opposition.
II
III
".~~.~~
,0~~'" .....~;;.,
,.0'-". \"to'
ft:J - ..- ! 'i',
~~\~ :~,);
t"ilo ~;.i
.;.,..... .. '" /'"
~, .........-::.....
~~...."o-4-.4
.......~~
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: CRESCENT COMMUNITY CENTER, Conditional Use Permit (church), 1401
Lynnhaven Parkway, Unit 101. ROSE HALL DISTRICT.
MEETING DATE: February 24,2009
. Background:
The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit to allow a church within a
portion of an existing commercial center. The commercial center consists of a
retail strip and a separate office building. The proposed church will be located in
one of the units of the office building.
. Considerations:
There will be one service on Sunday. The time for the service may vary. The
maximum attendance for the service is twenty-five individuals. The hours for the
church will be Monday through Friday from 10:00 a.m. until 8:00 p.m. Saturday
and Sunday, the office will be open from 1 :00 p.m. until 5:00 p.m. During the
week, there will be between three and five volunteer church members in the
office.
This proposal for a church is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan's
recommendations for this area. The proposal to use this unit as a church is
compatible with the other uses within the center, as well as with the adjacent
neighborhood. There is adequate parking for the church and the other users
within this commercial center. Church uses characteristically have a "non-rush
hour" traffic pattern and are compatible with commercial and office land uses.
The Planning Commission placed this item on the consent agenda because the
use is compatible with the surrounding area and there was no opposition to the
request.
. Recommendations:
The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 9-0 to approve
this request with the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall comply with all applicable City requirements for building
codes, including fire safety and suppression, required for a change of use
from commercial to a place of assembly prior to commencing church
activities. This includes a Fire Inspection, a Fire Code Permit, and a
Crescent Community Center
Page 2 of 2
Certificate of Occupancy from the Building Official's Office.
2. The number of congregants at any time shall not exceed the occupancy
number for the unit as established by the Fire Marshall.
. Attachments:
Staff Review
Disclosure Statement
Planning Commission Minutes
Location Map
Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends
approval.
Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department ;\ ~
City Manager: ~ ':I k. :ct3lNl-L ~ · -
II
REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit for a church
ADDRESS I DESCRIPTION: 1401 Lynnhaven Parkway
III
CRESCENT
COMMUNITY
CENTER
Agenda Item 9
January 14, 2009 Public Hearing
STAFF PLANNER:
Karen Prochilo
GPIN:
1485783134
ELECTION DISTRICT: SITE SIZE: AICUZ:
ROSE HALL Total site size: 3.797 acres 65 - 70 dB DNL
Lease space: 2,062 square feet
The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit to allow a
church within a portion of an existing office-retail center.
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
The hours for the church will be Monday through Friday from 10:00 a.m. until 8:00 p.m. Saturday and
Sunday, the office will be open from 1 :00 p.m. until 5:00 p.m. During the week, there will be between
three and five volunteer church members in the office.
There will be one service on Sunday, The time for the service may vary. The maximum attendance for the
service is twenty-five individuals.
LAND USE AND ZONING INFORMATION
. Single-family dwellings / PD-H1 Planned Unit Development
District
. Across Lynnhaven Parkway, single-family dwellings / PD-H1
Planned Unit Development District
. Within the center are retail spaces.
EXISTING LAND USE: Commercial business and retail center
SURROUNDING LAND
USE AND ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
CRESCENT COMMUNITY CENTER
Agenda Item 9
Page 1
. Across Primrose Lane is a retail center / PD-H1 Planned Unit
Development District
West: . Multi-family dwellings / PD-H1 Planned Unit Development
District
NATURAL RESOURCE AND
CULTURAL FEATURES:
There are no significant natural resources or cultural features on this
property as it is almost entirely impervious.
IMPACT ON CITY SERVICES
MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN (MTP) I CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP): Lynnhaven
Parkway in the vicinity if this application is classified as a four lane major urban arterial. There are currently no
planned improvements to this portion of Lynnhaven Parkway.
TRAFFIC: Street Name Present Present Capacity Generated Traffic
Volume
Lynnhaven 37,500 ADTT 27,300 ADT 1 (CAPACITY Existing Land Use" - 89
Parkway (2007) - Level of Service "D") - ADT
31,700 ADT 1 (Level of Proposed Land Use 3 -
Service "E") 18 ADT weekday
73 ADT Sunday
1
Average Dally Tnps
2 as defined by 2,OOOSI specialty retail
3 as defined by 2,000 SF church
FIRE: Applicant must obtain a Certificate of Occupancy prior to utilizing this space as an assembly use.
EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of this request with the conditions below.
Comprehensive Plan:
The Comprehensive Plan designates this area as a Primary Residential Area. The land use planning
policies and principles for the Primary Residential Area focus strongly on preserving and protecting the
overall character. economic value and aesthetic quality of the stable neighborhoods located in this area.
In a general sense, the established type, size, and relationship of land use, both residential and non-
residential. located in and around these neighborhoods should serve as a guide when considering future
development.
Evaluation:
This proposal for a church is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan's recommendations for this
area, The proposal to use this unit as a church is compatible with the other uses within the center, as well
CRESCENT COMMUNITY CENTER
Agenda Item 9
Page 2
III
as with the adjacent neighborhood. The facility has adequate parking. Church uses characteristically
have a "non-rush hour" traffic pattern and are compatible with commercial and office land uses.
CONDITIONS
1. The applicant shall comply with all applicable City requirements for building codes, including fire safety
and suppression, required for a change of use from commercial to a place of assembly prior to
commencing church activities. This includes a Fire Inspection, a Fire Code Permit, and a Certificate of
Occupancy from the Building Official's Office.
2. The number of congregants at any time shall not exceed the occupancy number for the unit as
established by the Fire Marshall.
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.
CRESCENT COMMUNITY CENTER
Agenda Item 9
Page 3
AERIAL OF SITE LOCATION
CRESCENT COMMUNITY CENTER
Agenda Item 9
Page 4
l"'J
~
'~
n
d
I
PRIMRO~[ LN
~ .. -, ~
1tHtH1
-
- \>-
/f't \~
~
I!/ J \<
~~ \~
I mtm
\i
~
--.J
~
i I
I
,/'-~,~;. I
XI:;~".:~~.I(h{", ',:;:>~;."f;
.'.
',' I 7\:'
1 ~ <-~.~
/' / :52s
0.-" 0\,1\
o r.
/' W.I ';,
f-'- '; \
"ct / U; _I\l~
PROPOSED SITE PLAN
CRESCENT COMMUNITY CENTER
Agenda Item 9
Page 5
.........-
~
,
-Ijl
--'l<--
j,
'!
"
bH:J bl bl
blblblbl
blblblbl
-'r "
" II .~ blblQQ
o .. ~
.~:: rlrlQQ_
;' =6=
'0-0
-'r ii bl bl bl bl
l'
.1 "_'""
~
[ il:ji -"'<-
! Ii '-
'.......1....... .:*
14'-9"
@ FLOOR PLAN
AEI02
1/4" = 1'-0.
t -~
a:'-"
/
;..
C ElOS~ ADJAl:E1I' SPACES; '""'
NOT IN ClJllRACT ---'
to;
--_.,_.~--
_'W""~"~"~_"'_~___C_'____"_
-.."."...-- ~ ----..-----,..--.-
CRESCENT COMMUNITY CENTER
Agenda Item 9
Page 6
III
PHOTOGRAPHS OF LEASE SPACE
CRESCENT COMMUNITY CENTER
Agenda Item 9
Page 7
~ tlf-s~.le Crescent Communitv Center
~~~.~\~~ ~~'i9~;'~/'~
M ~~.~~ ",.~,~~_o '~~"
~ '~I.~:6iIl ~!l1I '" '-.11= M~/'l~
~ ~ " " ~ ... '-'- -~ ~.
~ ~ ,"" ..V';X - . '\. ,\:......).c-.;J\ ~ ''\,o'7!''''~
~~~ \" \~~~~ ~) ... I~~~~'i~:~;'~~}~:.o"~~
II~'~\\ \ ~\. _ ' \""- )l ~ f,.~ ICot.. ~~. ~ I!~~_'t:. ~ .~ lJII
. ~ ~C\"r, 0 ~ 1k ~ l<.J~ ~
~'I tr::l 6.....~ ~ ^I. . ~~ ~ ~vc~/$I~
~LJ .. ~ ~lC .>Jr ,\
_ ~ ~ " \'t,~~ ~\
(~ I.~/K ~~~~~~ ~~
L/\r1pj .<! .,..~ ~'\ ::x. J~
DB' l .Bl ..- _) " '\ \. .~:;:::::~~ ~... ,,~ \~Q~
..-....... \ ~ M P"\:_ ~-/'~-AO f _ ~ '\
~~~~/ "if/" ~ ~ ~ ~< 'rr::\ " \ f\ .~~ ,,", x-~ ~ J~
~ ,"\1 2 ~:~~ 1811 ~ /J'l"~ ~ ~~\~,,\0.~~\
-l ~ ~. 'l ')j )\\. \. \'1. \~ ~:..o
~~. . .~~5(;> ~ "~ ~~h\,'~~~\
N11 ~ III 1_1l. A... ),~.:lI~ 'E;;I N "
~.i 1\", .... Itloo~Q.1 :')0 ~\~ I\. ~ ~ ~
I I'd .~ T' rr \\' 0 ~ vr.;..'\. ~ .... OJ\\ '\." I\.;;';
CUP for Refigous Use (church)
1 10/12/99 Modification to Green Run Land Use Plan (Group Home) Granted
2 08/12/97 Conditional Use Permit (Church) Granted
mi/14/84 Modification to Green Run Land Use Plan (Car wash) Denied
10/11/82 Modification to Green Run Land Use Plan (Commercial
site) Granted
3 0~)/23/95 Modification to Green Run Land Use Plan (Automobile
service establishment) Granted
ZONING HISTORY
CRESCENT COMMUNITY CENTER
Agenda Item 9
Page 8
l~i~b/L~~~ L~:LI
IOI~bl:;;tl~~"
::'NUKt:. ::'HAl.;r,
I DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
APPLICANT DISCLOSURE
If the applicant is a corporaijpn. partnership, firm, business. or other unince: pcrated
organization, complete the following:
1. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers, members, rustees,
I'lArtn~rs, etc. be!"w: (Aff:i!t:h li.O:' if nI'!NIQ.Q~~~1
President: 5yed K Haider
\/i,..a cafDciliDnt. Ihrahin'\ I:tfhaM
Secretary: Mohamed Feyed
2. List all businesses that have a parent-subsidial)'l or affiliated business I' ,tity2
relationship vJith the opplicnnt: (,A.ffc:ch !!=t !f .~~~~~~~rl)
None
o Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, bus ,ess, or
other unincorporated orgCl:lizgticn.
PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE
Complete this section only ~",p'!>rf}1 f)'N'l(H i.g differrmt from ~p!,fi!:g!,!t.
If the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other
unincorporated organization. complete the following:
1. List the property owner narnt: ioiiowt!o uy [he IId'lItll> ui tlii officers, ~rs,
trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary)
~OOb~RD !Q.EY-\L iY LL(' (QW~H'-) :\ohn~. Wuodo...rA c;..- )
H.Q('l~ r WoorlrJ.aJ) Ar\.lh"'''' T w,)od~J. ",J., :!.lh.... T Wl1Cx:JC<.,-J r.-
2. list all businesses that nave a parent-suOSIOlaly" or anlllatea bUSinesS r ,tiV
relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary)
None
U Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, Irm,
business. or other unincorporated organization.
, & l! See next page for footnotes
Does 1m omciai or empioyee UI ihe CilY UI Viryif,ii:l oedl.i I i IdVl:: an interest: the
subject land? Yes _ No ~
If yes. what is the name of the official or employee and the nature of their ir. erest?
Co~dltIO~" U.e Permit AppHcaUOn
PaQe 9 olIO
R.;"'..d 71312007
III
r'A~t. 10:::1:':;/ u~
z
o
~
-'~
~
........
....:4
~
~
F-t
~
.--.
~
~
f"T'""!
CI-:J
;::::J
~
~
,0
1-..-
!~
~
c:::a
...~
"r......
o
c....J
CRESCENT COMMUNITY CENTER
Agenda Item 9
Page 9
1~i06i2aa8 23~27
z
o
.......
~
U
~
ea
E--t
~
g:
~
;::J
~I
o
.......
E--t
.......
~
~
U
75736863'34
sr'''IOKE SHACK
PAGE c"';, G...
DISCLOSURE !;i: ~ATI::M~~T JI
"t
.
ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES
List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide se' 'ices with respect
to the requested property u~c, :nc!ud~~g t:~~ ~ot 'kr.itc~ ~o the provid' rs of architccturn! I
services. real estate services, financial services, accounting service' and legal
services: (Attach list if necessary)
~
I
~
\
Woodard Realty, Mezan Accounting Services
, 'Parent-subsidiary relationship" means "a relationship that exists' ....en one
corporation directfl! or indirectlv owns shares possesslnq more than 50 pe: :ent of the votinQ
power of another corporation." See State and Local Government Conflict f Interests Act, \/;:.
Code 92.2.3101.
2 "Amllated buslncs::; entity relatJonship" maans "a rcl..tior.::-.i.., oIl". . than parent.
subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a cont. IlIing ownership
Interest in the other business entity. (ii) a controlling owner in one entity is Iso a controlling
OW'It~1 ill ttle uih~t ~lItiiYI uf ,;iij tll.:ii: ;6, ~;.'Ol'::~ j","IGiiiawc.i'ilel.t ui ooiliiui L~' "~t!11 lhl:: lJu~ille~:.
entities. Factors that should be cOnsidered in determining the existence 0' an affiliated
business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially I e same person
own or manage the two entities: there lire ('.ommon or commingled funds l assets; the . .
business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or other, ise share activities,
resources or personnel on a regular basis: or there is otherwise a close w 'king relationship
hf!lWllf!n thP. entitiro.!':." Rp-~ Statf! l'Inrt Il)cal (;n\IP.rnmp.nt Cnnflict (If lmeres' ; Act, Va. Code 9
2.2-3101.
I
i
\;
.
I
~\J~I~
Wool>t'feo
I
.
,
1:
CERTIFICATION: I certify that the informatIOn contained herein IS true and a' ~rate.
I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has b en scheduled for
public hearing. I am responsible for oblaining and posting the required sign on thl: subject property at
leasi 30 days prjor iLl .ill: scileUui~u puu;j... i,tidjj';!:I u.............~:I;~ ~v .i;ci iu:-i,uGiions iI' .his package. In~
undef!ligned elso connents to entry upon the subject propetty by employees of th' Department of
Planning to photograph and view the site for purposes of processing and evaluati 1 this application.
~~
N~ ,:rea", vJodo....J
Property Owner's Signature (if different than apflUeant)
tJ. lip-I.! ,.To 1'\ N
Print Name
Cor .IO~11 u!U! Permit Appll~3tir.,r
P_g@ 10011 C
Rev'sed ?!3"O~7
CRESCENT COMMUNITY CENTER
Agenda Item 9
Page 1 0
III
Woodard Realty liC
Celebrating 52 }'l!ar:s ~ 1956 - 2008
Woodard Management Inc.
2464 East little Creek Road
Norfolk, VA 23518
757-583-4391 Telephone
757-583-8961 Facsimile
WoodardllC@aol.com
October 7, 2008
To whom it may concern:
RE: Crescent Community Center
Located at 1431 Lynnhaven Pkwy
Unit 101/102
Primrose Office Bldg. .
Virginia Beach, VA 23~3
The Crescent Community Center has our permission to use the whatever parking lot is needed at
either the Primrose Office Building or the adjoining Primrose Shopping Center, both properties
are owned by Woodard Realty LLC.
Sincerely,
K(M'1~ uJ~(
Mary Joan Woodard
Member, Woodard Realty LLC
PARKING LETTER
CRESCENT COMMUNITY CENTER
Agenda Item 9
Page 11
Item #9
Crescent Community Center
Conditional Use Permit
1401 L ynnhaven Parkway
District 3
Rose Hall
January 14,2009
CONSENT
Joseph Strange: The next matter is item 9. An application of Crescent Community Center
for a Conditional Use Permit for a church on property located at 1401 Lynnhaven Parkway,
District 3, Rose J-Iall with two conditions.
Syed Haider: Good afternoon. Syed Haider.
Joseph Strange: Would you state your name please?
Syed Haider: Syed Haider.
Joseph Strange: Are the conditions acceptable?
Syed Haider: Yes sir.
Joseph Strange: Okay. Thank you. Is there any opposition to this matter being placed on the
consent agenda? The Chair has asked Gene Crabtree to review this item.
Eugene Crabtree: This application is for a Conditional Use Permit in a community center for
a church that will operate primarily one service a week on Sunday. It will be opened during
the rest of the week. There was some concern about this creating noise but this happens to be
in a noise zone from the Naval Air Station Oceana. From the planes, I don't think any
church service will drown out the planes. The fact that this church is in a separate building
from the shopping center itself, and is all to the side, so it is self contained, it has a very small
congregation of only 25 people, the parking is adequate for that. So, therefore, we put it on
the consent agenda.
Joseph Strange: Thank you Gene. Madame Chair, I will make a motion to approve agenda
item 9.
Janice Anderson: A motion by Joe Strange and a second by Gene Crabtree.
AYE 9
NAY 0
ABSO
ABSENT 1
ANDERSON AYE
BERNAS AYE
CRABTREE AYE
i I
III
Item #9
Crescent Community Center
Page 2
HENLEY
HORSLEY
KA TSIAS
LIV AS
REDMOND
RUSSO
STRANGE
AYE
ABSENT
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
Ed Weeden: By a vote of9-0, the Board has approved item 9 for consent.
Janice Anderson: Thank you. Thank you Joe for taking on the consent agenda. I want to
thank everybody that had an application on the consent agenda for coming down today.
Thank you very much.
III
CARLA GRAHAM
Relevant Information:
· Kempsville District
· The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit for a cosmetology
school.
· The applicant proposes to educate students in classroom theory and
practical experience in the art of hair styling and salon operation.
· The applicant proposes three full-time and six part-time positions in
the salon, and 12 students and two instructors on site.
· AICUZ is Less than 65.
Evaluation and Recommendation:
· Planning Staff recommended approval
· Planning Commission recommends approval (10-0).
· Consent Agenda.
· No opposition.
III
&~~~
,(.s<~~ ..... ...g,"~~
~a-I 'oF
(Ii- - \'~)
(51 . '~~~,
~.\-' :,~
1\, Ejf
~... ~~"i'
~~~y
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: CARLA L. GRAHAM, Conditional Use Permit (cosmetology school), 5760
Princess Anne Road. KEMPSVILLE DISTRICT.
MEETING DATE: February 24,2009
. Background:
The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit to allow a cosmetology school
in a portion of the commercial building on the site. The applicant proposes to
educate students in classroom theory and practical experience in the art of hair
styling and salon operation.
The submitted plat depicts the existing 3,426 square foot commercial building, a
2,167 square foot single-family dwelling, and a 450 square foot shed. An on-site
inspection revealed 14 parking spaces existing on the site, and a single entrance
to the site from Princess Anne Road. Tax records indicate all the buildings were
built in 1966; however, staff suspects the buildings existed prior to that date as
the zoning maps dated before 1966 depict the site as it exists today.
. Considerations:
The applicant currently operates a school at 835 Virginia Beach Boulevard. The
applicant now desires to operate a second school in the western part of the city
at the subject site. The applicant proposes three full-time and six part-time
positions in the salon, and 12 students and two instructors on site. Hours of
operation will be 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Tuesday through Thursday, 9:00 a.m. to
7:00 p.m. Friday, and 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Saturday. The operation will be
closed Sunday and Monday.
The Comprehensive Plan recognizes this site to be within the Strategic Growth
Area 3 (Newtown SGA). Strategic Growth Areas are designated to absorb most
of the City's future growth, and, as such, are planned for more intensive uses
than most other areas of the city. Additionally, this site is located 1,000 feet to the
east of the location of the proposed Newtown Light Rail Transit (LRT) Station.
The LRT line currently under construction in Norfolk will terminate at this station.
As this site is within the Newtown SGA, Staff views this use as one that will
ultimately be replaced when market conditions change and this site becomes ripe
for redevelopment. A detailed plan for the Newtown SGA will be prepared in
2009, and the applicant and the property owner are being encouraged to
participate in its development.
Carla Graham
Page 2 of 2
The Planning Commission placed this item on the consent agenda because the
use is compatible to the surrounding area and there was no opposition to the
proposal.
. Recommendations:
The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 9-0 to approve
this request with the following condition:
1. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits and inspections from the
Department of Planning I Permits and Inspections Division and the Virginia
Department of Health.
. Attachments:
Staff Review
Disclosure Statement
Planning Commission Minutes
Location Map
Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends
approval.
Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department
City Manager~~ k . ~0Il<a.
REQUEST:
Conditional Use Permit for a cosmetology school
ADDRESS I DESCRIPTION: 5760 Princess Anne Road
III
CARLA GRAHAM
Agenda Item 4
January 14,2009 Public Hearing
STAFF PLANNER:
Faith Christie
GPIN:
1467041217
ELECTION DISTRICT:
KEMPSVILLE
SITE SIZE:
48,300 square feet
1,746 square foot unit
AICUZ:
Less than 65 dB DNL
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit to allow a
cosmetology school in a portion of the commercial building on
the site. The applicant proposes to educate students in classroom theory and practical experience in the
art of hair styling and salon operation. The applicant currently operates a school at 835 Virginia Beach
Boulevard, and 96 percent of her students who sit for the Virginia State Board of Barber and Cosmetology
test obtain their trade license (see attached "Proposal Description"). The applicant proposes three full-
time and six part-time positions in the salon, and 12 students and two instructors on site. Hours of
operations will be 10:00 am to 6:00pm Tuesday through Thursday, 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Friday, and
8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Saturday. The operation will be closed Sunday and Monday.
The submitted plat depicts the existing 3,426 square foot commercial building, a 2,167 square foot single-
family dwelling, and a 450 square foot shed. An on-site inspection revealed 14 parking spaces existing on
the site, and a single entrance to the site from Princess Anne Road. Tax records indicate all the buildings
were built in 1966; however, staff suspects the buildings existed prior to that date as the zoning maps
dated before 1966 depict the site as it exists today.
CARLA L. GRAHAM
Agenda Item 4
Page 1
LAND USE AND ZONING INFORMATION
EXISTING LAND USE: Currently, the commercial building houses a beauty salon and car detailing operation.
A non-conforming single-family dwelling and shed are located behind the commercial building.
SURROUNDING LAND
USE AND ZONING:
North:
South:
. Offices / B-2 Community Business
. Princess Anne Road
. Across Princess Anne Road are retail and service uses / B-2
Community Business and 1-1 Light Industrial
. Offices / B~2 Community Business
. Offices f B-2 Community Business
East:
West:
NATURAL RESOURCE AND
CULTURAL FEATURES:
Approximately two-third of the site is landscaped with grass, shrubs and
trees. There are no significant natural resources or cultural features
associated with the site.
IMPACT ON CITY SERVICES
MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN (MTP) I CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP): Princess Anne
Road in front of this request is a four-lane minor arterial roadway. Princess Anne Road currently has a variable
width right-of-way; however, the Master Transportation Plan depicts a divided roadway with a bikeway and
ultimate width of 100 feet. There are no CIP projects scheduled for this section of Princess Anne Road.
TRAFFIC: Street Name Present Present Capacity Generated Traffic
Volume
Princess Anne 28,812 ADT' 22,800 ADT 1 Existing Land Use L - 75
Road ADT
Proposed Land Use 3 - 67
ADT (4 AM /7 PM peak
hour)
1 Average Daily Trips
2 as defined by 1,746 square feet of retail space
3 as defined by 1,746 square feet of beauty salon / cosmetoloav school
WATER and SEWER: The site is connected to City water and sewer.
SCHOOLS: School populations are not affected by the request.
EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of this request with the conditions below.
CARLA L. GRAHAM
Agenda Item 4
Page 2
III
Comprehensive Plan:
The Comprehensive Plan recognizes this site to be within the Strategic Growth Area 3 (Newtown SGA).
Strategic Growth Areas are designated to absorb most of the City's future growth, and, as such, are
planned for more intensive uses than most other areas of the city. Additionally, this site is located 1,000
feet to the east of the location of the proposed Newtown Light Rail Transit (LRT) Station. The LRT line
currently under construction in Norfolk will terminate at this station.
As this site is within the Newtown SGA, Staff views this use as one that will ultimately be replaced when
market conditions change and this site becomes ripe for redevelopment. A detailed plan for the Newtown
SGA will be prepared in 2009, and the applicant and the property owner are encouraged to participate in
its development.
Evaluation:
Staff finds the request for Conditional Use Permit for a cosmetology school acceptable subject to the
condition listed below.
CONDITIONS
1. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits and inspections from the Department of Planning I
Permits and Inspections division and the Virginia Department of Health.
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.
CARLA L. GRAHAM
Agenda Item 4
Page 3
AERIAL OF SITE LOCATION
CARLA L. GRAHAM
Agenda Item 4
Page 4
III
()
()
'--
Proposal Description:
Another Level College of Cosmetology (ALCC) is a licensed school teaching students the skills
necessary to make a living as a licensed cosmetologist (see attachment). Presently, the school
is operational at 835 Virginia Beach Boulevard serving approximately 14 students. ALCC was
established in October, 2005 and has operated with a Virginia Beach business license since that
time. It is our request to establish a second location for the College at 5760 Princess Anne Rd.
operated In conjunction with our existing beauty salon in the same location. The salon Is now
open and presently provides a variety of services to customers Including:
. Hair styling
. Manicures
. Pedicures
. Facial services
. Makeup artistry
. Waxing services
AlCC students complete 1500 hours of classroom theory and practical experience in order to
obtain their diploma. Upon obtaining their diploma, they become eligible to take the Virginia
State Board of Barber and Cosmetology test leading to a trade license. To date, 96% of
students who have completed the curriculum have successfully gained this license. 100% of
licensed former students have been successfully placed In cosmetology related jobs by ALCC. It
Is our objective to continue this successful practice at our new location.
The addition of this second location will enable us to better serve students living in the
western part of Virginia Beach in addition to young adults from the cities of Norfolk,
Portsmouth and Chesapeake. In addition, Community Solutions, a licensed child placing agency
located adjacent to the salon Is supporting this endeavor. Community Solutions provides
treatment services to Hampton Roads' foster youth and has Identified several aging out (ages
18 - 21) clients who could benefit from the completion of a licensed cosmetology program.
The combination of completing the cosmetology curriculum and working in the salon will
, provide an opportunity to young adults at high risk of being unemployed upon emancipation
from the foster care program.
It is our goal In operating both the salon and college to employ three full time and six part
time employees in this previously vacant storefront. As the owner-operator of ALCC I am
requesting the granting of a Conditional Use Permit to provide the service listed above. Thank
you for your consideration.
CARLA L. GRAHAM
Agenda Item 4
Page 5
:
..
-.
~~
~ -
-. .
" ....-
.~
..
CD
.,1
.,.
i ..-...:...
~t!~
I Ji \.V
.
.. t.' --
.. ~;-...--.... - ~~-:..
--~'.
,,,"- .
\-
!
.
- ~
! ; .
t .-
~E~: .
e .... i I =
CUD "1
. i I . i '
~:~t l.t
riil;! ,!.
. -II , .
: I' ! " :
i .s~... .r,.,
..., ... ~
i'" . t.
.!It ! ': .;
r~ :.! .
u . .
E
a
!!
i
..
..
!
I
...
\.
-)
~
.
1
-~
-'l;m
......'
....... .
. J.t I
. .t ..~
i
:..
t
~
.
'I
.-"!!:'-~-=- .--- -----
..
i
.
i .
I ......
t
It
..
j
.
............
Pllllle~U .,,,.,
flO&D
~
-I __&~C.~
..,.. ...
SITE SURVEY
CARLA L. GRAHAM
Agenda Item 4
Page 6
_c----------
--- - ----------~
\---
\
\
\
\
\~
\
\
-0
<:t
If) \
t\1.,{) i~
~' t\1 \ e,O'
If)!<n ~,
'C"""\
-..
o
."!
. ,-
(')
('"l
~
~ ,e,O'
<:..s i<t'
.:;. .... \t-\
If) <n 'C"""
~
('"l
Oi
C\
~
o
o ~
('"l
N
~
1_
~--_..
$
"0
c!.
Q)
c
.a
f./)
f./)
Q)
(j
C
.-
\00-
0..
o
c.o
~
BU\LO\NG fOO"{PR\N"{
cp..p.,LA L. Gp.,AH~
p..genda \tere
pagl
1. 4/8/08 Conditional Use Permit Permanent Make-u
2. 10/28/97 Rezoning (1-1 Light Industrial to Conditional B-2
Communit Business
3. 12/12/!~5 Rezoning (1-1 Light Industrial to Conditional 1-2 Heavy
Industrial
A roved
Approved
Approved
ZONING HISTORY
CARLA l. GRAHAM
Agenda Item 4
Page 8
I
I DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
APPLICANT DISCLOSURE
If the applicant is a corporation, partnership, firm, business. or other unincorporated
organization, complete the following:
1, List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers. members, trustees,
partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary)
~1Jr/a. L. t9r,-h4Jn
2, List all businesses that have a parent-subsidiary1 or affiliated business entity2
relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary)
(Tl r Me
Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or
other unincorporated organization,
PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE
Complete this section only if property owner is different from applicant.
If the property owner is a corporation. partnership, firm. business. or other
unincorporated organization. complete the following:
1. List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members.
trustees. partners. etc. below: (Attach list if necessary)
1JaLNe.'\ S \ t('
(\') ((:-0 \' \-\ ,-:, h
2. List all businesses that have a parent-subsidiary1 or affiliated business entityl
relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary)
E;tCheck here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm,
business, or other unincorporated organization,
1 & 2 See next page for footnotes
Does an official or employee of the City of Virginia Beach have an interest in the
subject land? Yes _ No L
If yes, what is the name of the official or employee and the nature of their interest?
Conditional Use Permit Application
Page 9 of 10
Revised 71312007
Ii I
z
o
I I
~
u
:::f
J:L..t
~
E--t
~
~
J:L..t
~
CI":)
i:::J
~
o
I I
E--t
I I
Q
Z
o
u
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
CARLA l. GRAHAM
Agenda Item 4
Page 9
z
o
I I
E
:::3
~
~
f-t
I I 1 "Parent-subsidiary relationship. means "a relationship that exists when one
i corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting
power of another corporation,. See State and Local Govemment Conflict of Interests Act, Va.
Gode ~ 2.2-3101,
2 "Affiliated business entity relationship. means "a relationship, other than parent-
~ :subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a controlling ownership
.-- . mterest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in one entity is also a controlling
~ ,~ner in the other entity, or (iii) there is shared management or control between the business
~ ~;tntities. Factors that should be considered in determining the existence of an affiliated
business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person
~)Wn or manage the two entities; there are common or commingled funds or assets; the
~ business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities,
~ resources or personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship
........, between the entities.. See State and Local Govemment Conflict of Interests Act, Va. Code ~
~2.2-3101,
<z CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate.
II understand that. upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for
~)Ublic hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at
O ~st 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing according to the instnlctions in this package The
iJndersigned also consents to entry upon the subject property by employees of the Department of
I . Planning to photograph and view the site for purposes of processing and evaluating this application,
H ~w ~1&.!~ cJrM~
~ ,. .'1\. I .' .'\ ,,',. .., "., .
~ -- t. \.-,,' "-" 1 .-' ., \ 'j \ ~- ",. \ ' -.
Z Property Owner's Si'gn~ture (if di~rent than applicant) Print Name
o
U
I
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ~
ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES
List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect
to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural
services, real estate services, financial services, accounting services, and legal
:services: (Attach list if necessary)
Conditional Use Perm" Application
Page 10 of 10
Rellised 71312007
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
CARLA L. GRAHAM
Agenda Item 4
Page 10
III
Item #4
Carla L. Graham
Conditional Use Permit
5760 Princess Anne Road
District 2
Kempsville
January 14,2009
CONSENT
Joseph Strange: The next application is agenda item 4. An application of Carla L. Graham
for a Conditional Use Permit for a cosmetology school on property located at 5760 Princess
Anne Road, District 2, Kempsville with one condition.
Carla Graham: Hello.
Joseph Strange: How are you?
Carla Graham: I'm fine.
Joseph Strange: Your name please?
Carla Graham: My name is Carla Graham.
Joseph Strange: Okay Carla. Are all the conditions acceptable?
Carla Graham: Yes sir.
Joseph Strange: Alright. Thank you very much.
Carla Graham: Thank you.
Joseph Strange: Is there any opposition to this matter being placed on the consent agenda?
The Chair has asked Henry Livas to review this item.
Henry Livas: The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit to allow a cosmetology
school in a portion of the commercial building on the site. The applicant proposes three full
time and six (6) part-time positions in the salon, and twelve (12) student and two (2)
instructors on site. The site has a 3,426 square commercial building along with fourteen (14)
parking spaces. Additionally, this site is located 1,000 feet east of the Norfolk Light Rail
Transit Station. It's the last station on that system. Having received no complaints, we have
recommended approval of the requested Conditional Use Permit and we have placed it on our
consent agenda.
Joseph Strange: Thank you Henry. Madame Chair, I will make a motion to approve agenda
item 4.
Item #4
Carla L. Graham
Page 2
Janice Anderson: A motion by Joe Strange and a second by Gene Crabtree.
AYE 9 NAY 0 ABSO
ANDERSON AYE
BERNAS AYE
CRABTREE AYE
HENLEY AYE
HORSLEY
KA TSIAS AYE
LIV AS AYE
REDMOND AYE
RUSSO AYE
STRANGE AYE
ABSENT 1
ABSENT
Ed Weeden: By a vote of9-0, the Board has approved item 4 for consent.
" I
RICHMOND 20 MHZ dba NTELOS
Map 1-6
5 1
Richmond 20 MHZ d/b/a NTELOS
"DO"O~:~ ~ ot U,~~ klJJ1 ~ r~ ~JI~ d'e/'....'
j,.. d ~ ~ ~;.r~~ ,11 ~~ ,~ r!?~ ~
. ~"-1, -l -\) ,~ ~ ~.., .x..4 f?
/~ ~v~ 'tI ~ 'l~ ~ ~~ ~ ---41'_~/ '..
~ W " ~ ' - ~--' ,~'" '" ~..
. * 0' ~ ~ ~ ~"~ :J~I~ "\ :;.><~, · ~
~ / 0 ~ - .,,~ ~~~ ~~~~~~.J
- IlIr - ., <> ~ ----
m~~~ ~\U-{'~~?
() :r~~, 2 ~ . IT,
\ 'l '- ~ .... ' 8A.,...,. ~ (] .
~ .. I.l'-- '-) ",
'-- ...."tLL ~ l!;f ~. ~ IV ~
a~lrL ~_~~ d ~~~
a1 '" ~ I M ~i~" c... \ ~
:l \t - -LJ I .. II::t ~ ~ ~\ ~
~d~;~et?~~~alt!Ju rJ,.L~
,;"" JJ _ J' 'illld f'tll..""':.o '~ ::::::---
-----
~~..r1r:.n 2 ':; ~ ~ /~ - ..
CUP for Communication Tower
Relevant Information:
· Beach District
· Conditional Use Permit for a communications tower.
. The proposed monopole tower will be 95 feet tall (including a lighting
rod), and will hold antennas for three (3) separate wireless carriers.
The antennas are mounted on the inside of pole rather than outside
the pole.
· AICUZ is > 75 and APZ-2.
Evaluation and Recommendation:
· Planning Staff recommended approval
· Planning Commission recommends approval (10-0).
· Consent Agenda.
· No opposition.
" I
r
~~"'"
&~~,... .....t~"
fJl' ~, \\1
~fji . "h~
c\~ :~,.,
,\.;.- III
~.S~~~
~~~.
""
"-
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
~
ITEM: RICHMOND 20MHZ, L.L.C. D/B/A N TELOS, Conditional Use Permit,
(communication tower), 345 North Great Neck Road. BEACH DISTRICT.
MEETING DATE: February 24,2009
. Background:
The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit to allow construction of a
wireless communications tower and related equipment on a vacant and
unimproved site. The site is bordered on the east by a shopping center, on the
south by an appliance repair shop, and to the north and east by Poyner Lane and
residential.
. Considerations:
The proposed monopole tower will be 95 feet tall (including a lighting rod), and
will hold antennas for three (3) separate wireless carriers. The antennas are
mounted on the inside of pole rather than outside the pole. Ground-level
equipment will be located to the north and west of the proposed pole. The entire
lease area will be encompassed by a six-foot tall chain-link fence with an access
gate. As required by Section 232 of the City Zoning Ordinance, the applicant
submitted the required structural report indicating that the proposed tower is
designed in accordance with the Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA-
222G) standards and the American Society Civil Engineers (ASCE 7) for 115
mile per hour, 3-second wind speed. The applicant has also submitted a
Nonionizing Electromagnetic Radiation Report (NIER) indicating that there is no
identified area accessible to the general public that exceeds the limits specified
by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
The Planning Commission placed this item on the consent agenda because the
tower meets the criteria for tower location specified in Section 232 of the City
Zoning Ordinance and there was no opposition to the request.
. Recommendations:
The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 9-0 to approve
this request with the following conditions:
1. The tower shall be constructed substantially as shown on the site plans
entitled "nTelos Telecommunications Facility; Chesopeian Colony (RMB-
5428)", prepared by Johnson, Mirmiran & Thompson, dated December 1,
2008. The plans have been exhibited to City Council and are on file with the
Richmond 20MHZ, L.L.C. d/b/a Ntelos
Page 2 of 2
Department of Planning.
2. The tower including antennas and lightning rod shall not exceed 95 feet in
hei~Jht.
3. In the event interference with any City emergency communications facilities
arises from the use of this tower, the user( s) shall take all measures
reasonably necessary to correct and eliminate the interference. If the
intelference cannot be eliminated within a reasonable time, the user shall
immediately cease operation to the extent necessary to stop the interference.
4. Should the antennas cease to be used for a period of more than one (1) year,
the applicant shall remove the antennas and their supporting tower and
related equipment.
5. The Director of Planning may allow the installation of a type of antenna
different from that shown on the plans described in Condition 1 if the Director
determines that the proposed antenna type will (a) not result in any undue
impact beyond the antenna type shown in the submitted plan in the plan
described in Condition 1 and (b) meets all other relevant requirements of
Section 232 of the City Zoning Ordinance.
6. The applicant shall install a solid wood privacy fence around the proposed
telecommunication tower and/or ground equipment depicted on the final site
plan, with final approval at the discretion of the Planning Director. No barbed
wire shall be permitted.
7. No signs indicating the location of this facility are allowed.
8. Existing trees on-site shall remain undisturbed and protected.
. Attachments:
Staff Review
Disclosure Statement
Planning Commission Minutes
Location Map
Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends
approval.
Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department
City Manager~ lL ' ~bfI\..
REQUEST:
Conditional Use Permit for communications tower
ADDRESS I DESCRIPTION: 345 N. Great Neck Road
GPIN:
1497959915
ELECTION DISTRICT:
BEACH
III
RICHMOND 20MHZ,
LLC, D/B/A
NTELOS
Agenda Item 8
January 14, 2009 Public Hearing
STAFF PLANNER:
Leslie Bonilla
SITE SIZE:
0.48 acres
AICUZ:
Greater than 75 dB DNL /
APZ2
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit to allow
construction of a wireless communications tower and related
equipment on a vacant and unimproved site. The proposed monopole tower will be 95 feet tall (including
a lighting rod), and will hold antennas for three (3) separate wireless carriers. The antennas are mounted
on the inside of pole rather than outside the pole.
The site is bordered on the east by a shopping center, on the south by an appliance repair shop, and to
the north and east by Poyner Lane and residential. Additional space on the tower is available for two (2)
future antenna collocation opportunities, with their ground-level equipment located to the north and west
of the proposed pole. The entire lease area will be encompassed by a six-foot tall chain-link fence with an
access gate.
LAND USE AND ZONING INFORMATION
EXISTING LAND USE: Undeveloped vacant site
RICHMOND 20MHZ, LLC, D/B/A NTELOS
Agenda Item 8
Page 1
SURROUNDING LAND
USE AND ZONING:
North:
. Poyner Lane
· Single-family homes! R-10 Residential District
. Retail! B-2 Community Business District
. Retail! B-2 Community Business District
. Poyner Lane
. Single-family homes! R-10 Residential District
South:
East:
West:
NATURAL RESOURCE AND
CULTURAL FEATURES:
The majority of the site is a grass field. There is existing landscaping on-
site including oak and bayberry trees.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of this
request with the conditions below.
EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION
Evaluation:
The communications tower has been designed to accommodate up to three (3) antennas. As required by
Section 232 of the City Zoning Ordinance, the applicant submitted the required structural report indicating
that the proposed tower is designed in accordance with the Telecommunications Industry Association
(TIA - 222G) standards and the American Society Civil Engineers (ASCE 7) for 115 mile per hour, 3-
second wind speed. The applicant has also submitted a Nonionizing Electromagnetic Radiation Report
(NlER) indicating that there is no identified area accessible to the general public that exceeds the limits
specified by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
Section 232(b)(1) of the City Zoning Ordinance stipulates the minimum setback requirement from the
base of the tower to any property line abutting a residential use or district must be equal to 110 percent of
the height of the tower. This would require the residential property line to be 104.5 feet away from the
tower. The closest residential property line appears to be approximately 120 feet from the tower.
Section 232 811so specifies that no communication tower may be located closer to an existing residential
structure than the distance equal to 125 percent of the total height of the tower and antennae. In this
application, the provision would require that the tower should be at least 118.75 feet from any residential
structures. The closest residential dwelling appears to be approximately 185 feet from the tower. Existing
landscaping combined with proposed landscaping provides an adequate buffer between the proposed
tower and existing residential community.
It is staff's opinion that this proposal would provide a needed service to the community, is not intrusive to
the visual aesthetics of the community, and meets the criteria for tower location specified in Section 232
of the City Zoning Ordinance.
CONDITIONS
1. The tower shall be constructed substantially as shown on the site plans entitled "nTelos
Telecommunications Facility; Chesopeian Colony (RMB-5428)", prepared by Johnson, Mirmiran &
RICHMOND 20MHZ, LLC, D/B/A NTELOS
Agenda Item 8
Page 2
II
III
Thompson, dated December 1, 2008. The plans have been exhibited to City Council and are on file
with the Department of Planning.
2. The tower including antennas and lightning rod shall not exceed 95 feet in height.
3. In the event interference with any City emergency communications facilities arises from the use of this
tower, the user(s) shall take all measures reasonably necessary to correct and eliminate the
interference. If the interference cannot be eliminated within a reasonable time, the user shall
immediately cease operation to the extent necessary to stop the interference.
4. Should the antennas cease to be used for a period of more than one (1) year, the applicant shall
remove the antennas and their supporting tower and related equipment.
5. The Director of Planning may allow the installation of a type of antenna different from that shown on
the plans described in Condition 1 if the Director determines that the proposed antenna type will (a)
not result in any undue impact beyond the antenna type shown in the submitted plan in the plan
described in Condition 1 and (b) meets all other relevant requirements of Section 232 of the City
Zoning Ordinance.
6. The applicant shall install either a blaok vinyl ooated ohain link fenoe or a solid wood privacy fence
around the proposed telecommunication tower and/or ground equipment depicted on the final site
plan, with final approval at the discretion of the Planning Director. No barbed wire shall be permitted.
7. No signs. indicating the location of this facility are allowed.
8. Existing trees on-site shall remain undisturbed and protected.
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.
RICHMOND 20MHZ, LLC, D/B/A NTELOS
Agenda Item 8
Page 3
AERIAL OF SITE LOCATION
RICHMOND 20MHZ, LLC, D/B/A NTELOS
Agenda It~m 8
Page 4
\ \
....
,..
"
,
,
,
,
--.....-----
,
" ~.
, >r'
J ~~.<
I ~~+
! ~~-t~,.
I
I
,
I
I
,
\
I
\
\
\
\
,
,
,
,
,
...
...
...
...
...
...
--
\
,
,
,
...
...
...
"
...
,
,
,
,
\
\
\
\
\
II
I
IlIi.Il6l'
Iff II
iDN!'1i;aZ
E1fY.l5tX' I
I
I
I
I
I
I
...-..;ED '!1Jx':I1 J
';[$ffIJC/WO"D 2D Wl'lotl'
~ "
,
,
,
,
,
"
,
"'....
--------""""
sn:E~
~fII.(J
~. O'~'
~ I' . (,0,.0-
PROPOSEO S\lE P'-"~
RICl-lt.AONO ZOt.AI-IZ. LLC. 011311>- NiEL(
I\.genda \te~
pag
I~'I/CL TO TOP OF tAiHTNING ROO
~ RA{). COtTER OF FU!JL!!L__
ANT f ",,~ fI6f7 t ICl. J
RA/). CfltTER OF
.AI. NrELQ5 flH(HIJOHD ..2Q..M!1I.,U&J
"Vliiff"ltAS 089' tltCU
~ RID. CENT!.R JJLUi!~--
NffENltAS Ore? IIIGLJ
a.
1'1
.,
o
...
~
&
0-
.J
d
.i
....
f1'
GRQUt4(J llNf
- ICE BRllx;[
. COO/PI/EN'
PLATFORIJ
PROPOSED TOWER ELEVATION
RICHMOND 20MHZ. LLC, D/B/A NTELOS
Agenda Item 8
Page 6
II
III
.' · Federal Aviation AdOstration
Air Traffic Airspace Branch, ASW -520
2601 Meacham Blvd.
Fort Wortb, TX 76137-0520
CJ
Aeronautical Study No.
2008-AEA-3199-0E
Prior Study No.
2008-AEA-2150-0E
Issued Date: 11113/2008
Chris Sahr
NTELOS (CS)
415 Port Center Parkway
Suite 95
Portsmouth, VA 23701
.. DETERMINATION OF NO HAZARD TO AIR NAVIGATION **
The Federal Aviation Administration has conducted an aeronautical study under the provisions of 49 D.S.C.,
Section 44718 and if applicable Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 77, concerning:
Structure:
Location:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Heights:
Antenna Tower NR-5428
Virginia Beach, VA
36-50-36.88N NAD 83
76-02-58.29W
95 feet above ground level (AGL)
110 feet above mean sea level (AMSL)
This aeronautical study revealed that the structure would have no substantial adverse effect on the safe
and efficient utilization of the navigable airspace by aircraft or on the operation of air navigation facilities.
Therefore, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, it is hereby determined that the structure would not be a
hazard to air navigation provided the following condition(s) is(are) met:
It is required that FAA Form 7460-2, Notice of Actual Construction or Alteration, be completed and returned to
this office any time the project is abandoned or:
_X_ At least 10 days prior to start of construction (7460-2, Part I)
_X_Within 5 days after the construction reaches its greatest height (7460-2, Part II)
See attachment for additional condition(s) or information.
Based on this evaluation, marking and lighting are not necessary for aviation safety. However, if marking
and/or lighting are accomplished on a voluntary basis, we recommend it be installed and maintained in
accordance with FAA Advisory circular 70n460-1 K Change 2.
The structure considered under this study lies in proximity to an airport and occupants may be subjected to
noise from aircraft operating to and from the airport.
Any height exceeding 95 feet above ground level (110 feet above mean sea level), will result in a substantial
adverse effect and would warrant a Determination of Hazard to Air Navigation.
This determination expires on 05/13/2010 unless:
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
APPROVAL LETTER
RICHMOND 20MHZ, LLC, D/B/A NTELOS
Agenda Item 8
Page 7
(u). extended, revisedQrminated by the issuing office. 0
(h) the construction is subject to the licensing authority of the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) and an application for a construction permit has been filed, as required by the FCC, within
6 months of the date of this determination. In such case, the determination expires on the date
prescribed by the FCC for completion of construction, or the date the FCC denies the application.
NOTE: REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD OF THIS DETERMINA nON
MUST BE POSTMARKED OR DELIVERED TO THIS OFFICE AT LEAST IS DAYS PRIOR TO THE
EXPIRATION DATE.
This det(~rmination is subject to review if ~ interested party files a petition that is received by the FAA on or
before December 13, 2008. In the event a petition for review is filed, it must contain a full statement of the basis
upon which it is made and be submitted in triplicate to the Manager, Airspace and Rules Division - Room 423,
Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Ave., Washington, D.C. 20591.
This dete:rmination becomes final on December 23, 2008 unless a petition is timely filed. In which case, this
determination will not become final pending disposition of the petition. Interested parties will be notified of the
grant of any review. For any questions regarding your petition, please contact Office of Airspace and Rules via
telephom~ - 202-267-8783 - or facsimile 202-267-9328.
This determination is based, in part, on the foregoing description which includes specific coordinates, heights,
frequency(ies) and power. Any changes in coordinates, heights, and frequencies or use of greater power will
void this determination. Any future construction or alteration, including increase to heights, power, or the
addition II)f other transmitters, requires separate notice to the FAA.
. Thisdetennination docs include temporary-construction equipment- such as cranes, derricks, etc., which may be
used during actual construction of the structure. However, this equipment shall not exceed the overall heights as
indicated above. Equipment which has a height greater than th~ studied structure requires separate notice to the
FAA.
This determination concerns the effect of this structure on the safe and efficient use of navigable airspace
by aircraft and does not relieve the sponsor of compliance responsibilities relating to any law, ordinance, or
regulation of any Federal, State, or local government body.
This aeronautical study considered and analyzed the impact on existing and proposed arrival, departure, and
en route procedures for aircraft operating under both visual flight rules and instrument flight rules; the impact
on all existing and planned public-use airports, military airports and aeronautical facilities; and the cumulative
impact resulting from the studied structure when combined with the impact of other existing or proposed
structures. The study disclosed that the described structure would have no substantial adverse effect on air
navigation.
An account of the study findings, aeronautical objections received by the FAA during the study (if any), and the
basis for the FAA's decision in this matter can be found on the following page(s).
A copy of this determination will be forwarded to the Federal Communications Commission if the structure is
subject to their licensing authority.
Ifwe can be of further assistance, please contact Donna ONeill, at (816)329-2525. On any future
correspondence concerning this matter, please refer to Aeronautical Study Number 2008-AEA-3199-0E.
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
APPROVAL LETTER
RICHMOND 20MHZ, LLC, D/B/A NTELOS
Agenda Item 8
Page 8
II
III
# Date Action
1 8-26-65 Granted
8-26-65 Granted
2 7-13-93 Granted
3 12-14-93 Granted
4 5-8-89 Granted
ZONING HISTORY
RICHMOND 20MHZ, LLC, D/B/A NTELOS
Agenda Item 8
Page 9
~ DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
II
APPLICANT DISCLOSURE
If the applicant is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated
organization, complete the following:
1. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees,
partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary)
~~O.JP ~ MUz.. I LLC~ +~ ~ C,"",/.\.'t'~ ')
2. List all businesses that have a parent-subsidiary' or affiliated business entifi
relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary)
o Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or
other unincorporated organization.
PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE
Complete this section only if property owner is different from applicant.
If the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other
unincorporated organization, complete the following:
1. List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members,
trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary)
.~ M. MLt:.~
2. List all businesses that have a parent-subsldiary1 or affiliated business entitf
relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary)
o Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm.
business, or other unincorporated organization.
l & 2 See next page for footnotes
Does an official or employee of the City of Virginia Beach have an interest in the
subject land? Yes _ No .::t...
If yes, what is the name of the official or employee and the nature of their interest?
Conditicmal Use Pennil Application
Page 9 of'O
Revised 3/11/08
~
I I
~
U
~
~
~
E-t
~
8:
~
~
;:::J
~
o
I I
H
~
~
U
RICHMOND 20MHZ, LLC, D/B/A NTELOS
Agenda Item 8
Page 10
II
z
o
I I
~
U
I I
~
~
~
F-4
~
~
~
r:I:}
p
~
o
I I
F-4
I I
~
Z
o
u
III
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES
List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect
to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural
services, real estate services, financial services, accounting services, and legal
services: (Attach list if necessary)
Right Coast Consulting
1 "Parent-subsidiary relationship" means "a relationship that exists when one
corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting
power of another corporation." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va
Code ~ 2,2-3101
2 "Affiliated business entity relationship" means "a relationship, other than parent-
subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a controlling oWr'lership
interest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in one entity is also a controlling
owner in the other entity, or (iii) there is shared management or control between the business
entities. Factors that should be considered in determining the existence of an affiliated
business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person
own or manage the two entities; there are common or commingled funds or assets; the
business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities,
resources or personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship
between the entities." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act. Va. Code ~
2.2-3101,
CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate.
I understand that. upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for
public hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at
least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing according to the instructions in this package The
undersigned also consents to entry upon the SUbject property by employees of the Department of
Planning to photogr~h and view the site for purposes of processing and evaluating this application
/////~
AP~~n'iture t:~i!lla~
1lr>JJlj r/I, M.r WeLc,o.J
Pnnt Name
Conditional Use Permit Application
Page 100110
Revised 713/2007
RICHMOND 20MHZ, LLC, D/B/A NTELOS
Agenda Item 8
Page 11
James S. Quarforth
Garl A. Rosberg
David R. Maccarelli
Michael B. Moneymaker
Mary McDermott
Shirley J. Madison
RL. McAvoy, Jr.
NTELOS DISCLOSURE INFORMATION
MAY 31,2007
RICHMOND 20MHz, LLC
TRADING AS NTELOS
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
President
Executive Vice President
Executive Vice President. Chief Financial Officer,
Treasurer and Secretary
Senior Vice President
Assistant Secretary
Vice President
RIGHT COAST CONSULTING INC.
207 23RD STREET
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23451
RIGHT COAST CONSULTING INC
DISCLOSURE INFORMATION
William E. Gambrell Owner
Land Planner I Regulatory Consultant
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
RICHMOND 20MHZ, LLC, D/B/A NTELOS
Agenda Item 8
Page 12
II,
II
III
Item #8
Richmond 20MHz, L.L.c. d/b/a N- Telos
Conditional Use Permit
345 North Great Neck Road
District 6
Beach
January 14, 2009
CONSENT
Joseph Strange: The next item is item 8. An application ofN-Telos for a Conditional Use
Permit for a communication tower on property located at 345 North Great Neck Road,
District 6, Beach with eight (8) conditions.
Bill Gambrell: Mr. Strange. Thank you. Madame Chairman, Commissioners, my name is
Bill Gambrell. I'm a local land planner and I represent the applicant. I have a couple of
things for you today. First, I appreciate being on your consent agenda. Second, the
conditions are absolutely acceptable, and third, Happy New Year.
Janice Anderson: Thank you.
Joseph Strange: Thank you very much. Is there any opposition to this matter being placed on
the consent agenda? The Chair has asked Jay Bernas to review this item.
Jay Bernas: The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow construction of a
wireless communications tower on a vacant and unimproved site. The proposed monopole
tower will be 95 feet tall and hold antennas for three (3) separate wireless carriers. The
antennas will be mounted on the inside of the pole rather than on the outside of the pole. In
staffs opinion, they thought this was a needed service for the community. It is not intrusive
to the visual aesthetics of the community and meets the criteria for the tower location
specified in Section 232 of the City Zoning Ordinance. We did modify condition 6, which
eliminated the option of the chain link fence. We've heard no opposition and therefore have
placed this on the consent agenda for approval.
Joseph Strange: Thank you Jay. Madame Chair, I will make a motion to approve agenda
item 8.
Janice Anderson: A motion by Joe Strange and a second by Gene Crabtree.
AYE 9
NAY 0
ABSO
ABSENT 1
\
ANDERSON
BERNAS
CRABTREE
HENLEY
HORSLEY
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
ABSENT
Item #8
Richmond 20MHz, L.L.C. d/b/a N- Telos
Page 2
KATSIAS AYE
LIVAS AYE
REDMOND AYE
RUSSO AYE
STRANGE AYE
Ed Weeden: By a vote of 9-0, the Board has approved item 8 for consent.
\
II
III
ATTOM DONUTS
Map M-6
Attom Donuts Inc
Moo Not to Scola . .
t 1> 0 \ \:]\.-...1 )) U-- AO ~~ \ \..-1-1 r . ~ ~
'~~3
_ ---~.JW. t~~~1 \ ()4.\ '1 ~.
-1 ~-~~~ ~ ~-~ ~\ JiiT-3 J ,~ -,
- --- --~" - ~CdB.t~ II 2 ~ ~G) ~ ~~ ~
) "iI-{-::b ..\ ~ ~ --
" c::;- \)\c;t; 'T' 1......-::: - ~
& 1..fl t.'3(. ~~ ~ pO' ~ ~\ :1-c., -
~ 3
--- ~ . ~ .<''' =' I'
r""D \l RJi-. 0' - - - = LrlS ~ ~ ~ R XI' ,b lot ,
~~ - ~ ~ ~ \' \, t\9 ....l
~~s~ ~. 1 ~ ~L~~ r. rr;- ~~ -
~
I
;) ~ ~
I -- :l~'~ ~. ~ ~ r- .=- ~ !,..---
.......: ~
~ 05 - n T'! ~ ~~~ ~ ~
~ -
~w. - I T..& ,~ ~~ --
- \~ ~c f
~. ~. Ufi, -~
~~ \ ~~"rl .9 /~ ~ ~\ ~~ , ~ ~I~ U;
--- ~
CUP for Eating & Drinking Establishment wi Drive- Thru
Relevant Information:
· Beach District
. The applicant proposes to renovate the existing building for a drive-
through restaurant.
· AICUZ is 70-75.
Evaluation and Recommendation:
· Planning Staff recommended denial
· Planning Commission recommends approval (6-3-1).
· There was opposition.
II
III
~~~
tffl~~
V'~j
~~
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: ATTOM DONUTS, INC., Conditional Use Permit (eating and drinking
establishment with a drive-through window), 501 Laskin Road. AICUZ BEACH
DISTRICT.
MEETING DATE: February 24,2009
. Background:
The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit for drive-through facilities in
conjunction with an eating and drinking establishment (donut shop). Previous
users of the site include a dry cleaner and restaurants with a drive-through
facility. The Zoning Ordinance was amended in 2005 to require all drive-through
facilities within the RT -3 Resort District to obtain a Conditional Use Permit. The
Zoning Administrator determined this request for a restaurant with a drive-
through facility is a change of use (dry cleaner to restaurant) and a Conditional
Use Permit for the drive-through facility is required.
. Considerations:
The submitted site plan depicts the existing building, constructed in 1964,
associated parking, the existing free-standing sign, landscaping, and pavers. The
building is situated 51 feet from Laskin Road, 44 feet from Baltic Avenue, 23 feet
from the rear of the site, and 43 feet from the western side of the site. Fifteen
(15) parking spaces are depicted between the building and the right-of-ways and
three spaces are depicted on the western side of the site. Currently there are
three vehicular access points to the site, two on Laskin Road and one on Baltic
Avenue. A drive-through lane begins on the western side of the building, winds
around the rear of the building and along the eastern side of the building. The
installation of brick pavers are proposed along Laskin Road, adjacent to the
existing free-standing sign, and the corner of the site adjacent to the intersection
of Laskin Road and Baltic Avenue. A proposed pedestrian / handicap access
path will be installed from the intersection to the building.
According to the submitted building elevation, the exterior will be finished with
HardiePlank@siding and Dryvit@ (Exterior Insulation Finish System - EIFS). The
roofing will consist of architectural grade shingles. The windows and doors will
consist of aluminum storefront, and all the building trim will be vinyl. The
proposed building colors will be cream, tan, and brown. Signage will be the
standard Dunkin Donuts@ colors of orange and pink.
Attorn Donuts
Page 2 of 3
The proposal is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's recommendations
for this area. One of the guiding principles of the Oceanfront Resort Area Plan,
adopted in 2005, is to create resort area gateways that are attractive, provide a
sense of arrival, and direct visitors to places where they can park their cars and
use other transportation methods. The Laskin Road Gateway, as defined in the
Oceanfront Resort Area Plan, is located along Laskin Road from Little Neck
Creek to Pacific Avenue and along portions of Baltic Avenue, 29th Street, and
30th Street, and consists of a mix of commercial uses, most of which are small
shops and restaurants.
The Laskin Road Gateway Overlay District and the Resort Area Design
Guidelines were adopted to provide guidance in the development and
redevelopment of properties and infrastructure along Laskin Road, also known as
31st Stn~et. Moreover, in December 2008, the City Council adopted the Resort
Area Strategic Action Plan (RASAP), which recommends that development within
this corridor is to be urban in form, with the building mass located adjacent to the
sidewallk and roadway and parking located within the block, behind the buildings.
This proposal to redevelop the site for a donut shop with a drive-through facility is
not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan recommendations for the area, the
Laskin Road Gateway Design Guidelines, or the Oceanfront Resort Area Plan.
Staff compared the submitted site development plans and building elevations to
the criteria listed in the Laskin Road Gateway Overlay District, the design goals
of the Laskin Road Gateway Design Guidelines, and the objectives of the
Comprehensive Plan recommendations and the Oceanfront Resort Area Concept
Plan, and finds the request does not meet the stated criteria and goals of the
adopted ordinances and guidelines. The request is lacking in furthering
exceptional quality development in the area and in enhancing pedestrian facilities
and activities within this corridor. Moreover, in December 2008, the City Council
adopted the Resort Area Strategic Action Plan (RASAP), which recommends that
development within this corridor is to be urban in form, with the building mass
located .adjacent to the sidewalk and roadway and parking located within the
block, behind the buildings. The applicant's proposal is not consistent with the
plan.
Staff cannot support this request and recommends denial of the application.
There W.3S opposition to the request.
. Recommendations:
The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 6-3 with 1
abstention to approve this request with the following conditions:
1. The Baltic Avenue and Laskin Road streetscapes shall be designed to reflect
the street design of the recently completed Capitol Improvement Project CIP
II
III
Attom Donuts
Page 3 of 3
# 2-076 30th Street Laskin Road Gateway. This includes paving design,
plantings, street lighting, and site furnishings.
2. The proposed drive-through window shall be re-Iocated to the western or
southern side of the building. The applicant shall work with the City of Virginia
Beach Public Works Department I Traffic Engineering to implement an
adequate stacking area for the drive-through facility.
3. The northeast area of the site adjacent to both Laskin Road and Baltic
Avenue shall be re-designed to eliminate the parking stalls along Laskin Road
and incorporate low masonry seat walls, plaza development, seating, and
plantings to create an urban-like architectural edge.
4. The existing free-standing sign and adjacent 'drive-through' sign shall be
removed. The applicant may install only a monument sign, no more than eight
(8) feet in height, and similar in design to the Farm Fresh supermarket sign
west of the site.
5. A site plan depicting all the conditions listed above shall be submitted to the
City of Virginia Beach Planning Department I Development Services Center
for review and approval.
6. Improvements to the building shall substantially comply with the submitted
elevations entitled "Preliminary Elevations Dunkin Donuts @ Laskin Road",
dated November 3, 2008 and prepared by Warner and Associates Architects.
Said elevations have been exhibited to the City of Virginia Beach City Council
and are on file in the Planning Department. Modifications to the plans may be
approved by the Planning Director to accommodate the re-Iocation of the
drive-through facility.
. Attachments:
Staff Review
Disclosure Statement
Planning Commission Minutes
Location Map
Recommended Action: Staff recommends denial. Planning Commission recommends
approval.
~
Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department
City Manager:~\ \L . ~
REQUEST:
Conditional Use Permit for a drive-through facility
ADDRESS I DESCRIPTION: 501 Laskin Road
GPIN:
24189147690000
ELECTION DISTRICT:
BEACH
SITE SIZE:
.19,950 square feet
AICUZ:
70 - 75 dB DNL
#24
February 11, 2009 Public Hearing
APPLICANT:
A TTOM DONUTS
PROPERTY OWNER:
MURDEN REAL
ESTATE TRUST
STAFF PLANNER: Faith Christie
APPLICATION HISTORY: The application was deferred on December 10. 2008 at the request of the
applicant. The applicant met with the Resort Area Advisory Commission's Planning and Design Review
Committee on December 3, 2008 to discuss redevelopment of the site. The Planning and Design Review
Committee offered the following recommendations for site and building design that would complement the
Laskin Road Gateway Corridor:
1. The Baltic Avenue and Laskin Road streetscapes should be re-designed to reflect the street design for the
recently completed 30th street and 31 st from Atlantic to Pacific Avenues. This includes paving design,
plantings, street lighting, and site furnishings.
2. The existing Bon Air cleaners sign should be demolished and replaced with a monolith sign conforming with
the current sign ordinance and similar in nature to the Farm Fresh sign.
3, Consideration should be given to removing the parking stalls along Laskin Road and creating an urban
architectural edge perhaps incorporating low masonry seat walls, plaza development. seating, and plantings.
The PDRC will support any variance necessary for a reduction in parking in this area.
4. Consideration should be given to relating the building architecturally to Laskin Road with a possible
extension of the building architecture with an on-site outdoor cafe, etc.
5. The primary year around traffic for this facility will enter from Baltic Avenue as traffic engineering most likely
will not grant a left turn westbound from Laskin Road into this property as the curb cut is so close to the
intersection. Only traffic traveling east bound on Laskin will use the north entrance. With this in mind. we would
prefer to see the driveway window on the western side of the building out of the public view. The majority
of the traffic entering from Baltic Avenue will have ample queuing to come around the north side of the building
and queue up at the west side window.
ATTOM DONUTS,INC I MURDEN REAL ESTATE TRt1ST
Agenda Item. 24
Page 1
',t.
<, '::'
II
III
6. The architecture of the building while in conformance with corporate standards does not reflect the
architecture of the 31 Ocean redevelopment areas. Mansard roofs, large divided light windows, olive colored
EFIS, and brown hardy plank are not in keeping with a resort style. A tour of the recently completed Hilton,
Ocean Beach Club, Turtle Cay, Inlet Fitness, and several of the more recently completed or in progress
oceanfront hotels may provide some guidance as to the contextual design elements.
The applicant met with staff on December 22, 2008 to discuss the Planning and Design Review Committee's
recommendations for redevelopment of the site. Modified site plans implementing some of the
recommendations were submitted to staff on January 5,2009. Changes to the plans included:
. The deletion of one (1) parking space along the Baltic Avenue frontage;
. The addition of four (4) feet of concrete along the front of the building to be used for two tables and
planters;
. An increase in landscaping from 600 square feet to 1,137 square feet and the addition of a table and
benches at the intersection of Laskin Road and Baltic Avenue;
. Re-configuration of the parking and deletion of landscaping along Laskin Road.
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit to allow drive through facilities in conjunction with a
donut shop. Previous users of the site include a dry cleaner and restaurant with a drive-through facility.
The Zoning Ordinance was amended in 2005 to require all drive-through facilities within the RT -3 Resort
District to obtain a Conditional Use Permit. The Zoning Administrator determined the request for a
restaurant with a drive-through facility is a change of use and a Conditional Use Permit for the drive-
through facility is required.
The submitted site plan depicts the existing building, constructed in 1964, associated parking, the existing
free-standing sign, landscaping, and pavers. The building is situated 51 feet from Laskin Road, 44 feet
from Baltic Avenue, 23 feet from the rear of the site, and 43 feet from the western side of the site. Fifteen
(15) parking spaces are depicted between the building and the rights-of-ways and three spaces are
depicted on the western side of the site. Currently there are three vehicular access points to the site, two
on Laskin Road and one on Baltic Avenue. A drive-through lane begins on the western side of the
building, winds around the rear of the building and along the eastern side of the building. The installation
of brick pavers are proposed along Laskin Road, adjacent to the existing free-standing sign, and the
corner of the site adjacent to the intersection of Laskin Road and Baltic Avenue. A proposed pedestrian /
handicap access path will be installed from the intersection to the building.
According to the submitted building elevation, the exterior will be finished with HardiePlank'" siding and
Dryvit@ (Exterior Insulation Finish System - EIFS). The roofing will consist of architectural grade shingles.
The windows and doors will consist of aluminum storefront, and all the building trim will be vinyl. The
proposed building colors will be cream, tan, and brown. Signage will be the standard Dunkin Donuts@
colors of orange and pink.
LAND USE AND ZONING INFORMATION
-.';
ATTOM DONUTS, INC I MURDEN REAL E;STATE TRU,ST
Agenda Item 24
. Page 2
EXISTING LAND USE: A closed dry cleaning business
SURROUNDING LAND
USE AND ZONING:
North:
. Laskin Road
· Across Laskin Road are retail and restaurant uses / RT-3
Resort Tourist (Laskin Road Gateway Overlay)
· Parking area for Farm Fresh grocery store / RT-3 Resort
Tourist (Laskin Road Gateway Overlay)
. Baltic Avenue
· Across Baltic Avenue is a gas station with automotive repair /
RT-3 Resort Tourist (Laskin Road Gateway Overlay)
· Farm Fresh grocery store / RT-3 Resort Tourist (Laskin Road
Gateway Overlay)
South:
East:
West:
NATURAL RESOURCE AND
CULTURAL FEATURES:
There are no known significant natural resources or cultural feature
associated with the site. The site is entirely impervious.
IMPACT ON CITY SERVICES
MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN (MTP) I CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP): Laskin
Road is a four-lane urban arterial in front of this site. Laskin Road has a variable right-of-way width; the
Master Transportation Plan depicts an undivided highway with an ultimate right-of-way width of 88-feet.
Capital Improvement Program project (CIP) 2-143, Laskin Road Gateway Phase 1-A, is scheduled for this
segment of Laskin Road. The 30% design plans indicate a future right-of-way width of 80 feet for this
portion of Laskin Road.
Baltic Avenu€i is a two-lane collector. Baltic Avenue has a variable right-of-way width. This roadway is not
included in the Master Transportation Plan. There is currently no Capital Improvement Program project
scheduled for this segment of Baltic Avenue.
The entrance located off Laskin Road will require a physical deterrent to prevent left turns out of the site.
TRAFFIC: Street Name Present Present Capacity Generated Traffic
Volume
Laskin Road 29,515 ADT 27,300 ADT 1 Existing Land Use ~ -
750 ADT (11 AM /26
PM Peak Hour)
Baltic Avenue No Counts 9,900 ADT 1 Proposed Land Use 3 -
Available 893 ADT (53 AM / 12
PM Peak Hour)
Average Dally Tnps
2 as defined by 0.46 acres zoned RT -3 Resort
3 as defined by an 1,800 square foot donut shop with drive-through facilities
WATER: This site is connected to City water. The existing 1-inch meter may be used or upgraded to
accommodatE! the proposed development.
ATTOM DONUTS, INC I MURDEN REAL ESTATE TRUST
Agenda Item 24
Page 3
II
III
SEWER: This site is connected to City sanitary sewer. The applicant must provide an analysis of Pump
Station # 003 and the sanitary sewer collection system to ensure future flows can be accommodated.
EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION
Recommendation:
Staff recommends denial of this request.
Comprehensive Plan:
The proposal is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's recommendations for this area. One of the
guiding principles of the Oceanfront Resort Area Plan, adopted in 2005, is to create resort area gateways
that are attractive, provide a sense of arrival, and direct visitors to places where they can park their cars
and use other transportation methods, Building upon this concept, Laskin Road Gateway Overlay District
and the Resort Area Design Guidelines were adopted to provide guidance in the development and
redevelopment of properties and infrastructure along Laskin Road, also known as 31st Street. Moreover,
in December 2008, the City Council adopted the Resort Area Strategic Action Plan (RASAP), which
recommends that development within this corridor is to be urban in form, with the building mass located
adjacent to the sidewalk and roadway and parking located within the block, behind the buildings.
The Laskin Road Gateway, as defined in the Oceanfront Resort Area Plan, is located along Laskin Road
from Little Neck Creek to Pacific Avenue and along portions of Baltic Avenue, 29th Street, and 30th
Street, and consists of a mix of commercial uses, most of which are small shops and restaurants. Tracts
of undeveloped or underutilized land are located within the area, offering significant opportunities for the
development of a major resort-based activity center.
The Laskin Road Gateway should be improved so that it accomplishes the following three objectives.
First, Laskin Road, 30th Street, and 31 st Street must be able to direct traffic entering from the west to
parking garages where cars can be parked and individuals can easily transition to a pedestrian or transit
mode. Second, the streetscapes on these roadways must afford safe, pleasant, and convenient
pedestrian access between Baltic Avenue and the Boardwalk while also providing an enhanced shopping
experience for those pedestrians through the use of interesting storefront displays, cafes, and similar
activities. Finally, all improvements along this corridor must exhibit exceptional design quality, as
expressed in the Resort Area Design Guidelines.
To accomplish the first objective, the recommendations of the Resort Area Design Guidelines should be
adhered to, particularly in regard to limiting vehicular access points along Laskin Road and 30th Street.
Conveniently located parking facilities, integrated into the buildings, should replace all on-street and
direct-access parking, such as those currently along Laskin Road east of Baltic Avenue. The second
objective can be accomplished by widening the storefront sidewalks on both sides of Laskin Road east of
Baltic Avenue and by improving 30th Street to match the improvements on Laskin Road. The third
objective can be achieved by designing eye-catching landscaping and streetscape treatment along Laskin
Road. Many of these recommendations are embodied in the design plans that have been developed for
roadway and streetscape improvements to this area as part of the Laskin Road Gateway Capital
Improvement Program (CIP) Project 2-076. This CIP Project, combined with the already adopted
amendments to the City Zoning Ordinance for the RT-3(LRG) Laskin Road Gateway and the
accompanying Design Guidelines, puts all of the ingredients in place to move this area forward to being
part of a First Class Resort.
A TTOM DONUTS, INC I MURDEN REAL ESTATE TRUST
Agenda Item 24
Page 4
Evaluation:
Laskin Road serves many roles. It is a major east-west urban arterial road serving the east central area of
the Resort and is also one of the four main entrance roads in the Resort. The portion of Laskin Road
between Little Neck Creek I Beach Garden Park and Atlantic Avenue has served the role of "gateway" to
what many visitors perceive to be "Virginia Beach." However, a second role of this stretch of Laskin Road
is that of a 'Main Street' for the thousands of residents and workers in the northern area of the
Oceanfront. The interplay of these two roles on this section of Laskin Road have resulted in a four-lane
arterial highway serving both local and long-distance traffic constricted by a variety of land uses on each
side, largely Gatering to the residents in the immediate area. Compounding these dual roles and the
tension between them is the changing role of the Oceanfront Resort itself and its future. The growing
prominence of the Oceanfront Resort Area as a highly desired tourist and convention destination is
affecting and will continue to affect the role of Laskin Road and thus, its design and land use character.
With the devolopment of a high-quality, prominent hotel anchoring the terminus of Laskin Road (which
becomes 31st Street at that point), the role of this section of Laskin Road as not only a "gateway" but also
as an opportunity for higher quality and more intensive development is significant, as called for in the
Comprehensive Plan.
The Zoning Ordinance specifies that in the evaluation of a development or redevelopment proposal within
the Laskin Road Gateway, staff must use the following criteria found in Section 1521 (c) of the City
Zoning Ordinance to evaluate the proposal:
(c) Proposed conditional uses shall be evaluated for consistency with the following land use,
transportation. and aesthetic provisions in order to further the legislative intent of the RT -3 District and
the goals of the Comprehensive Plan and Oceanfront Resort Area Plan:
(1) Any development or redevelopment in this area should contribute to creating an attractive
wholesome family resort destination;
(2) The use should be consistent with the resort area goal to promote a safe, day and night, year
round resort destination;
(3) The use and structure should complement resort activity centers and corridors and advance
the area's public and private investments;
(4) All development and other physical improvements, such as landscaping, signs, lighting, and
other similar elements should strive to achieve a high level of design excellence and contribute to
a quality image as expressed in the Oceanfront Resort Area Design Guidelines;
(5) All transportation improvements should be designed to shift the dominant transportation
mode in the area from vehicular to pedestrian and transit; and
(6) The use should be appropriate for both local residents and visitors to the area.
Additionally, the proposed project must adhere to the following design goals found in the Laskin Road
Gateway Design Guidelines:
Desio" Goal: Provide interest at the street level and enhance the pedestrian experience. Align a
building's front at the sidewalk (right-of-way) edge. Locate on-site parking to minimize visibility
from the sidewalk. Parking should not be located so that it interrupts the storefront continuity
along the sidewalk. Place on-site parking behind the buildings, either at-grade or within a parking
structure.
ATTOM DONUTS, INC I MURDEN REAL ESTATE TROST
Agenda Item 24
Page 5
II
III
Desian Goal: Clearly identify the primary entrance to a building and orient it to the street. Orient
the primary entrances to the sidewalk and the primary pedestrian ways. Buildings located at the
intersection of roadways should be designed with angled entrances at the corner. Recessed
entries should be used in entrances at the corner. Use an awning, change in roofline, or other
architectural feature to define the entrance. Special paving treatments may be used to define the
entry.
Desian Goal: Design outdoor spaces to enliven the sidewalk level and provide for private open
space for shoppers, employees, and residents. The linear frontage of a commercial or mixed-use
building should include pedestrian-oriented elements, such as
. Transparent display windows,
. Outdoor dining areas (cafes),
. Public art or other public amenities such as fountains, benches.
Staff concludes that the proposal to redevelop the site from its current status as an abandoned dry
cleaner with a drive-through facility to a donut shop with a drive-through facility is not consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan recommendations for the area, the Laskin Road Gateway Design Guidelines, or the
Oceanfront Resort Area Plan. Staff compared the submitted site development plans and building
elevations to the criteria listed in the Laskin Road Gateway Overlay District, the design goals of the
Laskin Road Gateway Design Guidelines, and the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan
recommendations and the Oceanfront Resort Area Concept Plan, and finds the request does not meet
the stated criteria and goals of the adopted ordinances and guidelines. The request is lacking in furthering
exceptional quality development in the area and in enhancing pedestrian facilities and activities within this
corridor. Moreover, in December 2008, the City Council adopted the Resort Area Strategic Action Plan
(RASAP), which recommends that development within this corridor is to be urban in form, with the
building mass located adjacent to the sidewalk and roadway and parking located within the block, behind
the buildings. The applicant's proposal is not consistent with the plan.
The applicant proposes to redevelop the existing building and site, which is of a suburban design, into a
donut shop with a drive-through facility following the same suburban model. While the donut shop is an
acceptable use for this area and would complement the area, the submitted design is oriented to
automobiles, lacking in pedestrian friendly concepts. As envisioned in both approved planning policy for
this corridor and detailed planning currently under development, the vision for the Laskin Road Gateway
is of pedestrian oriented uses, consisting of buildings positioned at the right-of-way line, wide sidewalks,
cafes and seating areas, parking behind the buildings (or at the public parking facility at 30th Street). The
existing site has parking between the building and right-of-ways and proposes a drive-through facility that
will conflict with pedestrian movement on the site. The proposed drive-through facility is proposed on the
eastern side of the building with access to the drive-through winding around three sides of the building.
The pedestrian entrance to the building is not clearly defined and again will conflict with the drive-through
facility. The result is a vehicular and pedestrian circulation pattern that is awkward, with a number of
conflict points.
The proposed redevelopment of the site does not depict any outdoor spaces for the users of the site. The
proposed landscaping is not in keeping with the landscaping recently installed on 30th Street and
proposed for the 31St Street gateway treatment. The existing free-standing sign overhangs the public
right-of-way and exceeds the permitted height for free-standing signs in the City. The proposed
renovation of the building does use quality materials such as HardiePlank™ siding and architectural
grade shingles, but it still has the 'flavor' of a 1970's suburban style building.
Staff cannot support this request and recommends denial of the application.
ATTOM DONUTS, INC I MURDEN REAL ESTATE TRUST
Agenda Item 24
Page 6
CONDITIONS
These conditions were recommended by the Planning Commission February 11, 2009:
1. Thel Baltic Avenue and Laskin Road streetscapes shall be designed to reflect the street design of
the recently completed Capitol Improvement Project CIP # 2-076 30th Street Laskin Road
Gateway. This includes paving design, plantings, street lighting, and site furnishings.
2. The! proposed drive through window shall be re-Iocated to the western or southern side of the
building. The applicant shall work with the City of Virginia Beach Public Works Department /
Traffic Engineering to implement an adequate stacking area for the drive-through facility.
3. The northeast area of the site adjacent to both Laskin Road and Baltic Avenue shall be re-
designed to eliminate the parking stalls along Laskin Road and incorporate low masonry seat
walls, plaza development, seating, and plantings to create an urban architectural edge.
4. The existing free-standing sign and adjacent 'drive-through' sign shall be removed. The applicant
may install a monument sign, no more than eight (8) feet in height, and similar in design to the
Farm Fresh supermarket sign west of the site.
5. A site plan depicting all the conditions listed above shall be submitted to the City of Virginia
Beach Planning Department / Development Services Center for review and approval.
6. Improvements to the building shall substantially comply with the submitted elevations entitled
"Pre,liminary Elevations Dunkin Donuts @ Laskin Road", dated November 3,2008 and prepared
by Warner and Associates Architects. Said elevations have been exhibited to the City of Virginia
Beach City Council and are on file in the Planning Department. Modifications to the plans may be
approved by the Planning Director to accommodate the re-Iocation of the drive-through facility.
NOTE: Furttler 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.
ATTOM DONUTS, INC I MURDEN REAL ESTATE TRUST
Agenda Item 24
Page 7
II
III
AERIAL OF SITE LOCATION
ATTOM DONUTS, INC / MURDEN REAL ESTATE TRUST
Agenda Item 24
Page 8
z
<:
-1
0..
----~
f
n
n
~n
l-
~ VI g
a::: l-D~gOlO
W ::::l <l '"
0.. z5?:i:e~
o u"
WO:O~j-.n
VlO i.;i"':i;>-
::::l.....~~~:;~
~ Z"';:)
-1 Z - G....z
<: ::::l5i!!:.z::;
Z Cl >0:
52 c
,...
o
Z
o
U
~
f,
r"
. i
i ~
, ;
, ~
BALTIC AVf ~-\l
o
<l
o
'"
z
;<
Vl
~
! !
If
i~
"
.'
Ii
t
PROPOSED SITE. PLAN
ATTOM DONUTS, INC / MURDEN REAL ESTATE TRaST
Agenda I tell: 24
Page 9
II
-[ [
11
I.
L
]
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
IJ .L . Jj
J
6i
~
;
~
L
III
'"
~
o
~
"-::r.Q
,:~
;;j~~
Q~
>,'J.
':;1'"
Z<;:S
--' .1:1
~="
t;!
=:
lie
~
~
a
~
" /, - "
~~ 'J'~
-.... . I'
'C:Ie, ,;!
~~
- -
~...
I ~
~
':1
~
'4
~
;..
3
~ "
l)i.. ~
-<(: '.
! ~
': t : ;
....
..J ,
g ~ I
l: '"..1
u ~.>
II) :: 1
-J; ~ ~,
~ ~ ~
IV .
W.
~
'"
:::;
J:
<1'>
Z
~
to:'
C
ffi i
~
....
j t
~ ~
i ;
PROPOSED BUILDING ELEVATION
ATTOM DONUTS, INC I MURDEN REAL ESTATE TRUST
Agenda Iterq 24
Page 10
Attorn
Donuts. Inc.
Map .M-6
Moo Not to Scale
C ID\..-J '} ~ -~ ~ .\' ~ w _.~
~ ;;.0- - 1~f"':ir"U~ .~ J -\UV~ - l~ T-3 j ~ ~ ~\ ~
'n?7la....a t~'j 2\W~' RG) 1/ 1 ~ \ I ~~\ ~
IJ 't'-\1~ \\ H' - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -.,.;II e
~1~~rf ~\ P\i'~oL~~ ~~~
~. ~ \'L~~ (----'~ \. -=~..~.,.,., \ ~fS~N .b R
~) i~ .......-~/ ~ ~- '!f" \\ ~)j\~ ~\'.~ =-~.,.J
k~L~~ ~.~I"T ~ 'J 1t.-...r1 ~~~ 1,...... -.- ~ '\ II .-J-
~sj{ !'~ ~ ~'~ U ~'~ W;-\Q'" ~:...a~ ~
~ ~ '~ ~ ~ r1 I ~, ~~':-l ~m\\.-- ~
,. o~ RT-3 ~ ~n~; %\ % Y. ~It~l'" ~
L~. ---~ .:J~ e' '~iDrO ~ f-" ~ !....--
__\ftK(,) - Q l.-l ~ \( ll!I"'- , ~,... r .{}\ ::!
~ ~~ 7 ~~I~ ~~'R~l~
~~ ~ l\ ~ n .~~\~ll~~
.~ \\ ~ ]NEM'II I ~ ~\ ~~~~
1. 1/9/96
1/14/97
2. 1/9/96
3. 5/13/97
4. 5/28/02
3/27/01
5. 7/11/06
6. 5/9/00
7. 5/9/06
CUP for Eating & Drinking Establishment wi Drive- Thru
Street Closure
Street Closure
Street Closure
Rezonin A-12 A artment to Conditional RT-3 Resort Tourist
Conditional Use Permit (Commercial Parking Lot)
Conditional Use Permit Commercial Parkin Lot
Rezonin A-12 A artment to Conditional RT-3 Resort Tourist
Conditional Use Permit (Drive through facility for a financial
institution
Rezoning (A-12 & A-36 Apartment, RT-3 Resort Tourist to
Conditional RT-3 Resort Tourist with the Laskin Road Gateway
OverJa
Approved
Withdrawn
A roved
A roved
Approved
A roved
A roved
Approved
Approved
ZONING HISTORY
ATTOM DONUTS, INC I MURDEN REAL ESTATE TRUST
Agenda Item 24
Page 11
III
II
l
I DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
APPLICANT DISCLOSURE
If the applicant is a corporation, partnership. finn, business, or other unincorporated
organization, complete the following:
1. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees,
'partners, etc. below: (Attach list If necessary)
// John M.Cttta. Owner
2. List 811 businesses that have a parent-subsidlary1 or affiliated business entitf
relationship with the applicant (Attach list if necessary)
N/A
o Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnershiP. finn, business, or
other unincorporated organization.
PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE
Complet9lhis section only if property owner is different from applicant.
If the property owner is a corporation, partnership, finn, business, or other
unincorporated organization, complete the following:
1. List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members,
trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach Iiat if 119C9SS8/Y)
/
V Brian Ward Murden, Trustee for Murden Real Estate Trust
2. List all businesses that have a parent-subsldialY 1 or affiliated business entttf
relationship with the appHcant (Attach IlsIlf necessary)
MIA
o Check here If the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership. firm.
business, or other unincorporated organization.
, & 2 See next page for footnotes
Does an official or employee of the City of Virginia Beach have an interest in the
subject land? Yes _ No..L
If yes, what is the name of the official or employee and the nature of their interest?
Con<III\ClMIUsI Permit AppblIon
PIge , of 10
R8YIIId 71312007
III
~
I .
8
:=t
~
i
if
~
;:::J
~
CO
R
~
u
ATTOM DONUTS, INC I MURDEN REAL ESTATE TRUST
Agenda Item 24
Page 12
~
I I
8
S:!
~
i
if
~
~
~
o
I "
H
o
u
I
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT I
ADDmONAL DISCLOSURES
List all known contractors or businesses that have or wiN provide services with respect
to the requested property use, Including but not limited to the providers of architectural
~servlces. real estate services. financial services, accounting services, and legal
services: (Attach list If necessary)
r)
N/A .~
J\r-{ If lId ( l
(
,7
_ L_J_ \ L
\ \- { . {,( .
1 .Par8nkubsidlary reIatIonahlp. mana "s I'8IationahIp that exists when one
corporation directly or indirectly owns shares poue88lng more than SO percent of the voting
power of another corporation.. See State and Local Government Conflct of Interests Act, Va.
(:ode S 2.2-3101.
2 .Affiliated business entity reIatIonahlp. means .s relatlon8hlp, other than perent.
wbaidtary relationship, that exists when (I) one busine88 entity has a controlling ownership
Interest In the other buaInes8 entity, (U) . conb'Ollng owner In one entity 18 also 8 conlrollng
(>>Wner in the other entity. or (Ii) there Ie shared management or control between the business
tmlillea. Factors thai should be considered In determining the exIatence of an afll1la1ed
bu8Inea entity nttationIhfp Include IIat the ..me person or IUbet8ntiaIIy the ..me person
cwm or manage the two entIIles; there are common or commlngled fundi or a88818; the
bueineIa entitles share the u.. of the ..me of'ftces or employees or 01herwlee share actlvlfle8,
resources or personnel on 8 regular basis; or there Is otherwlae 8 doe. woridng .....tIonshlp
between the entitlea. . See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act. Va. Code S
2.2-3101.
C:ERTIFICA TION: I cerWy that the Infonnldlon conI8lned herein 18 true and accurste.
I &I'ldnI8nd ht. upon receipt of noIItIc8tIon (poItl::anJ) that tha appIIcllllon he8 been ech8duIed for
public '-lng, I am ,.polI.lble for obt8lnilIG BAd poetIng the reqLftd eign on the aubject property at
.- 30 d&ya prlor to the llChecRjed pubic heertn" ecc:ordIng to the Instructions in this peckage. The
LI1dnlgned 8180 corlI8fQ 10 upon the IWject property by employ", of the Depar1ment of
F~ 10 Md the 81. for purpotel d pI'OCeI8Ing end evalu8tlng this apptlcetlon.
V. (f/fA.Y)O.\
CondlUonal Uie Permit ApplIcation
PIge 10 of 10
RnIIId 71312007
ATTOM DONUTS, INC I MURDEN REAL ESTATE TRUST
Agenda Item 24
Page 13
II
III
Item #24
Attom Donuts, Inc.
Conditional Use Permit
501 Laskin Road
District 6
Beach
February 11,2009
REGULAR
Janice Anderson: We'll go ahead and resume. Thanks for the waiting here a few more
minutes.
Donald Horsley: Qur next item is item 24, Attom Donuts, Inc. An application of Attom
Donuts, Inc., for a Conditional Use Permit for eating and drinking establishment with a
drive-through window on property located at 501 Laskin Road, District 6, Beach.
C.J. Bodnar: Good afternoon Madame Chair and members of the Planning Commission. My
name is C.J. Bodnar. I'm the engineering manager for Hoggard Eure Associates located at
901 Port Center Parkway, Suite 5, Portsmouth, Virginia. It is my pleasure to be here today
on behalf of my client Attom Donuts, Inc., which is the franchisee for Dunkin Donuts on the
south side of Hampton Roads, and on behalf of the property owner Murden Real Estate
Trust. Mr. Murden is here also on behalf of their request for a Conditional Use Permit to
operate a drive-through on 501 Laskin Road. The site has in the past been a Rich's
Restaurant, a Golden Skillet, a service station, and a Bon Air Cleaners, all of which and
during that time period had drive-throughs. The last use, the Bon Air Cleaners, the drive-
through closed about 15 months ago. Attom Donuts, Inc. has signed a lease with the
property owner to renovate the existing building as a Dunkin Donuts facility. You have in
your package copies of the proposed site plan with the proposed building elevation, and I
have brought a large copy that is here just in case you need to see something a little larger.
In addition, I have color boards from the architect that I can provide to you so you can see
what the actual colors on the donut will be. Staff is recommending denial of the project
based on the goals of the Comprehensive Plan, Laskin Road Gateway Design Guidelines, and
Oceanfront Resort Area Plan. We have or feel that these documents are lacking in one
aspect. They address only demolition or reconstruction or new construction. They do not
address renovation of an existing facility. This is a key lacking element. In the financial
climate of today, no one can expect someone who is leasing the property to invest millions of
dollars to tear down an existing facility and build a new facility in order to meet a plan for
which no financing exists. In addition, these guidelines do not account for facilities already
in place, which in all likelihood will never be renovated or changed, facilities such as the
Farm Fresh grocery store next door to our site. It is no oriented towards Laskin Road. Its
parking is visible from the roadway, and it is not going to change. The Comprehensive Plan
and Oceanfront Resort Plan have six goals. We feel that we meet all six of these goals. Goal
1 is any development or redevelopment in this area should contribute to creating an attractive
and wholesome family resort area destination. Staffhas clearly stated in there in their staff
report that they think Dunkin Donuts would be an asset to the Oceanfront experience. Goal
Item #24
Attom Donuts, Inc.
Page 2
2, the use should be consistent with the Resort Area goal to permit a safe day and night, year
round destination. Any restaurant facility wants to create a safe destination for their patrons,
because if it is not safe, they patrons won't come back. Goal 3, the use of structures should
compliment Resort Area activity centers and corridors and advance the area's public and
private investments. Staffhas stated that we are using high quality materials in their staff
report. Based on conversations with staff, they are comfortable with the design of the
building, and as stated before, they feel that Dunkin Donuts would be an asset to the
Oceanfront experience. And as we will discuss later, this is a substantial private investment
in this area. Goa.l 4 states that all development and other physical improvements such as
landscaping, signs, lightings, and other similar elements would strive to achieve a high level
of design excellc~nce and contribute to a quality image as expressed in the Oceanfront Area
Resort Design Guidelines. We've adjusted the site plan to provide the exact same right-of-
way landscaping as is on the 30th Street Corridor that has recently been completed. And, also
what is proposed for the 31 st Street Gateway treatment. We've also eliminated the existing
non-conforming sign, although it would have been a great sign for donuts, and replaced it
with a standard monument sign as permitted at the Oceanfront. Goal 5 says the use shall be
appropriate for local residents and visitors to the area. Ray Eure, of our office, who
apologizes for not being able to be here today, has discussed the project with the civic league,
and they're all fi)r having a Dunkin Donuts at this location. The Garden Club of Virginia
Beach has stated that they would love to have another place down at the Oceanfront where
they could go to have informal meetings and get togethers. It is something that the residents
are happy about the idea of it being there. Goal 6 is all transportation improvements shall be
designed to shift the dominant transportation mode in the area from vehicular to pedestrian
and transit. This is the sticking point regarding the application with staff. You have to
understand as stated before all we're doing is renovating the existing building. We're not
tearing down the: building or building a new building or anything of that nature. We're
renovating the existing building. The entire site at this time is paved all the way to the right-
of-way line. It's paved all the way up to the sidewalks adjacent to the roadway. We've
revised the site to modify the parking to add landscape buffers as you can see on the site plan
between the parking and the right-of-way. We've clearly defined the pedestrian access to the
building and used nationally recognized identification methods for pedestrian crossings.
We've added an outdoor cafe at the front of the building to enhance the pedestrian
experience. Anal finally, we've add a table and seating area at the intersection of Baltic and
Laskin to provide detail shown on the Laskin Road Gateway Corridor exhibits. As part of
this plan, we have done everything that has been asked of us by the Planning staff and the
Resort Advisory Committee with two exceptions. We're not going to tear down the existing
building and move it closer to the street. And we have not switched the drive-through
window to the other side of the building. I have addressed the issue of moving the building
earlier. The moving of the drive-through window has not been done because (A) to move it
to the other side of the building would put the menu board on the Baltic Avenue side of the
building, and I think that would be detrimental to the appearance of the building and the
corridor; and (B) the stacking ofthe drive-through lane would then wrap around the front of
the building, which in our opinion would be a pedestrian hazard to people trying to access the
front of the building. We've been asked by some of the people that Ray Eure and I have
talked to and discussed the financial impacts on the project. The property is currently
Iii
II
III
Item #24
Attom Donuts, Inc.
Page 3
assessed with a land value of $924,700 and a value of the existing building of$85,100.
Based on our discussions with various appraisal and assessment fields, the land value would
be anticipated to increase $1,038,170 and the value of the building would increase $221,750.
In addition, Dunkin Donuts anticipates a minimum of $20,000 a week in sales, with an
average of $25,000 to $30,000 a week. Finally, Attom Donuts would be creating between 20
and 30 full-time and part-time positions at the restaurant. Finally, we would like you all too
also consider the implications on the property owner if you recommend denial to City
Council. In affect, you're telling the property owner he can't use the existing building in the
form that it is right now. It is our understanding from conversations with the property owner
that only interest in this site over the past few years have been from facilities that would
require a drive-through. In addition, we've talked to real estate professionals. They said the
building has no real use except for a facility that requires drive-through. In affect, you're
stating that he cannot use his current property as it is currently sited. In closing, we've
worked well with staff to try address all issues regarding this site. We've made numerous
revisions to the plan to ensure that the design work ends in conjunction with the
improvements currently shown on the 30th Street Corridor. While neither the owner nor
Attom Donuts would like to remove the existing sign, we've done so. We have added not
one but two seating areas to the site to provide multiple pedestrian access points to be able to
sit and have a donut and a cup of coffee. We know that this development is something that
the residents would like to see and would provide multiple benefits to the City of Virginia
Beach. We thank you for your time and consideration in this matter, and ask that you
recommend to City Council approval of this Use Permit. I'm available for any questions you
may have.
Janice Anderson: Thank you. Are there any questions of Mr. Bodnar? Go ahead.
Joseph Strange: Do you know in a typical Dunkin Donuts establishment what percentage of
the business is done through the drive-through.
C.J. Bodnar: The national average is between 60 to 70 percent of the business is done
through a drive-through as long as there is a drive-through. There are stores that don't have
one, but the average, when you have a drive-through is 60 to 70 percent.
Joseph Strange: Is there any information that is available that shows how it financially
impacts the establishment ifit doesn't have a drive-through?
C.J. Bodnar: I do not have any of that with me. Dunkin Donuts has not provided that to me.
I am sure it is available.
Janice Anderson: Go ahead Henry.
Henry Livas: You do have some Dunkin Donuts in this area that don't have drive-throughs,
or at least one. Is that correct?
Item #24
Attom Donuts, Inc.
Page 4
C.J. Bodnar: Yes sir. There is one on Virginia Beach Boulevard between Great Neck and
Lynnhaven that is almost 30 years old that doesn't have a drive-through.
Henry Livas: Is that one profitable?
C.J. Bodnar: That one is not owned by my client. So, I have no idea on that parcel. That is
owned by a diffc~rent franchisee. Every franchise location that Mr. Motta has bought in this
area, which includes one in Western Branch, the one on Shore Drive, the one that he is
currently working on off First Colonial, all have drive-throughs. And it's Dunkin Donut's
policy that any new store should have a drive-through.
Janice Anderson: Are there any other questions? I have a few. The conditions that you have
agreed to, and I guess there are no conditions printed out here. As far as the streetscape, you
would agree to match the pavings that have been done in this corridor and on 31 st Street, the
plantings and thc~ same street lighting?
C.J. Bodnar: Y{~s ma'am. My landscape architect also Poodle Puff Ligustrum tree form
ligustrums. He has already shown that on the plan along both Baltic Avenue and Laskin
Road. We've provided the scored concrete. Originally, if you look at Laskin Road on our
plan we had shown brick pavers to be installed thinking that would be an upgrade over
concrete. We have gone back to show it is going to be the same scored concrete, in the same
scored pattern that is on 30th Street.
Janice Anderson: Okay. The Comprehensive Plan and the vision is a pedestrian corridor up
and down Laskin Road. You have several parking spaces right on the front of your site plan
on Laskin Road. I know you are putting seating there in the corner. Would you consider
removing that parking and adding additional seating?
C.J. Bodnar: What we've added so far to the plans, we've added a seat here. We have two
benches, which would be the same type of benches that are installed on 30th Street. We've
also added two tables here. And all the tables come with the option of having an umbrella for
the table so you would have a place to get out of the sun and sit down and drink coffee on a
hot summer day.
Janice Anderson: I guess there was a recommendation from RAC, see where this parking is?
Those four right there, about replacing that with additional seating, benches, something like
that? Would that be a consideration?
C.J. Bodnar: Actually the plan, Madame Chair, that RAC saw did not even have this on the
plan.
Janice Anderson: Right. I know you changed that.
C.J. Bodnar: W<: actually had five parking spaces up here and preserving the existing sign,
which actually sets somewhere right about in here. So, what we've done is taken down the
II
III
Item #24
Attom Donuts, Inc.
Page 5
big frying pan handle sign, added the monument sign and reduced one of the parking spaces
to open up the seating area right there on the corner.
Janice Anderson: Okay. What I'm asking is would there be any impact to remove all those
parking spaces, or do you think you would need those? That whole area be a seating area
right up front.
C.J. Bodnar: From an engineering standpoint, you want to keep these, because it clusters the
front of the building. So, that would be my client's major concern, but if we had to lose two
of them, I could probably convince him to lose two of the parking spaces. And to widen this
out a little bit and pick up a little bit more green area.
Janice Anderson: Okay. Let's see, the drive-through? I talked to Mr. Eure, and I definitely
understand why you've got it over there on that side. Of course, I would prefer it on the
other side because it backs up to Farm Fresh and is not as visible. You got it right there on
Baltic Avenue and the drive-throughs are not envisioned in this area, so I don't want to put it
out there on the side of the street. What about the rear of the building? Because actually, I
think it would flow better. If you're coming from Laskin Road your menu sign could be right
where the drive-through is now, and then you could pick up your drive-through at the end of
the building and go straight out instead of doing a big circle.
C.J. Bodnar: I would have to talk to the architect about that. If! remember correctly, and as
Mr. Miller said earlier, I'm not an architect.
Janice Anderson: I'm probably messing up the whole inside, kind of rearranging things.
C.J. Bodnar: I'm not going to try to play one for you. But there is a freezer and cooler area
that is always in the back of the building, and with the way this building is set up there is
really no other way to move that freezer and cooler. You can't have the drive-through
window being behind those two facilities.
Janice Anderson: Ifwe could relocate it, like the Comprehensive Plan, they don't call for
drive-through here. I don't have a problem with it because you're reusing this site and this
building. I understand the restrictions that you have, but if we could make it less visible.
C.J. Bodnar: The only difficulty on that Madame Chair is that if we put it here, you have to
have six cars of stacking from this window to where the menu board is. Now the menu
boards sits out on this corner. And this menu board is where it shows what the products that
are available to order, and where the speaker would be.
Janice Anderson: You don't think it would be okay if you had it on the side of the building?
C.J. Bodnar: Unless I can get a waiver from City staff to allow me to have less than six cars
of stacking at the window, which they have been reluctant to do on other projects that I'm
working on.
Item #24
Attom Donuts, Inc.
Page 6
Janice Anderson: Okay. Those are the only things that I have right now. Go ahead Joe.
Joseph Strange: Since there is going to be more pedestrian traffic here than there would be at
most places that you would have a Dunkin Donuts, what additional safety features have been
put in there to protect the pedestrians from these cars coming in and out? Has any thought
been given to that?
C.J. Bodnar: Y~~s sir. We are planning on putting signage up showing the people driving the
car where the pedestrian crossings are located at. As you can see on the plan, we've shown
the pedestrian crossings. They are actually going to be stamped asphalt, and they will be red
to match the bril~ks that will be put along the side of the building and along that pavilion, so it
gives you that visual barrier that tells you as a driver, just as a crosswalk does when you're
driving down the street. Hey, hold up a second. There is something going here. I need to
slow down.
Janice Anderson: Go ahead Ron.
Ronald Ripley: I'm supportive of Jan. You have a denial recommendation by the staff.
They're saying that this doesn't fit, and this Commission, there are some people on the
Commission that are trying to work with you. How can we make this work so it does fit?
She is trying to find some areas where you can put these cars where they would be less
objectionable. You keep bringing up this reader board. Maybe we should see the reader
board you're talking about because if that is such an objection, maybe we need to deal with
that as well, because it is an issue. We want to see it. Why can't you put the drive-through
on the other side: as RAC has recommended?
C.J. Bodnar: That is difficult Mr. Ripley, and I'm going to try to use this thing. I will have
as much luck as the doctor did earlier, probably. The problem is if you put the window right
here, that is your drive-through window, you have to have your cars stacked coming around
this way. So, they're coming around the front of the building. This is your pedestrian access
coming into the site. So, now you got the cars parked in here to go through the drive-through
where the people are going to be walking through.
Ronald Ripley: Why can't you put it right where you're pointing to right now? You haven't
renovated the building yet, have you?
C.J. Bodnar: No sir. The only concern, and I understand that you all are trying to work with
me. I appreciate: that very much. The only concern that I have with that is in order to put
that window so that it is there, you would have to build out on the building. At that point we
would have to put an addition on to the building, right in this location to move that window.
There is an existing window here. And there is an existing window there. So, we were
trying to reuse the existing window, so that we weren't putting any additions on to the
building, to show that were doing construction. Ifwe show that we're doing construction
then you end up in a situation of why can't you tear the building down?
III
II
III
Item #24
Attom Donuts, Inc.
Page 7
Ronald Ripley: I don't follow you. If you don't get it approved it won't matter any.
C.J. Bodnar: I understand that sir. If we need to move the drive-through to this side of the
building, I will get with the architect, and we will make it work.
Ronald Ripley: I think that would help. It would help me in my decision.
C.J. Bodnar: If that is going to make you all more comfortable with the plan, we will make it
work.
Janice Anderson: I'm not in your business, but I know a lot of times you can have a reader
board right there, but that is not preferred, if you could do it on that side or the rear of the
building.
C.J. Bodnar: Maybe we can look to add something right here that will allow us to be able to
put the reader board somewhere it is not as visible.
Ronald Ripley: Jan, are you satisfied that he's met the other conditions RAC set forth.
Janice Anderson: The public put him in the condition. I don't have written conditions. We
don't have those. There are no conditions on here, but if we could print out conditions about
the paving and go right down at RAC had approved, I would like that and any kind of
approval.
Ronald Ripley: Do you want a copy of those conditions here, or do you want staff to defer
this and come back and add these conditions? I know that staff doesn't like to make
recommendations when they're recommending denial. I don't want you to compromise your
condition, but sometimes you say if were to be approved these conditions would need to be.
Janice Anderson: Well, we haven't heard everybody yet. So, let's hear everybody, and then
we'll talk about that. Are there any other questions of Mr. Bodnar? Thank you.
Donald Horsley: Also in support is Brian Murden.
Brian Murden: Madame Chairman and gentlemen of the Planning Commission, my name is
Brian Murden. I appreciate you all listening to us today. This is a big important decision for
my family especially. I like all of the things that you're asking here, and let me just give you
a little history for myself. My dad bought this property years ago with my granddad, and
we've gotten three ofthose corners on Laskin Road. We've been good tenants of the
property over the period of time. My dad ran his gas station there probably up until the 60's,
until he got sick. He was unable to perform his duties there anymore so that is when we
leased it to a Rich's, the first fast food restaurant in the Virginia Beach area. Actually, the
first burger joint, and from there it kind of kept going. Like you said from Golden Skillet to
Bon Air Cleaners, and everyone of those had a drive-through. Now, I'm third generation
family that has done business in Virginia Beach. If you count the old Princess Anne County,
Item #24
Attom Donuts, Inc.
Page 8
my family has been here for several generations. I was born on 25th Street. I was raised 310
30th Street, and we still own that property. I own Beach Gallery, which is on Laskin. It was
on 30th Street for the last 29 plus years. So, I'm very familiar with this area. And, it means
lot to me to hav,e a good plan in place for this area. I appreciate what the city planners have
done. I've seen the plans. I've been in Mr. Spore's office and talked to him. I mean, it is
really a beautiful plan. I've heard you all mention that it is going to happen quickly. I think
it is still a long term plan. And it is going to be implemented in stages, and we're not asking
for a lot oftime" It is a fairly good lease. It is a nationally known chain. I think it will be
good stewards to the property. In all honesty, actually, if you were all to deny this, it is going
to be an empty piece of property throughout this next summer, minimal. And I don't know
when it would be leased. I think this is a great opportunity for the City and for Dunkin
Donuts and for my family. I've mentioned my family more than once because it is an
income that we have depended on for years. It was on 10/20/07 the fire that Bon Air had put
them out of business finally. And, basically we need the money to have a nice life and enjoy
the city like everybody wants to enjoy it. I have plans for other properties in that same
general facility. We need this to happen in order for me to work on another piece of
property, actually two pieces of property. So, I just hope that you all don't confuse the long
term goal of the city and have it interfere with our short term plan that we have because I
think it would be beneficial to both parties. Are there any questions?
Janice Anderson: Thank you Mr. Murden? Are there any questions of Mr. Murden? Go
ahead Al
Al Henley: Someone mentioned earlier if we defer this for 30 days, or whatever, to write
some of these conditions that we've discussed, and Mr. Murden, if that occurred, would that
put your contract in jeopardy?
Brian Murden: Well, rent is supposed to start on March 1,2009. We ere suppose to go
before City Cowlcil on 24th, I believe it is. I think, and just looking at these plans. This little
section right heff~ and here (pointing to PowerPoint), those are actually raised up concrete
sidewalks right now. And they won't be allowed to come up on the left side ofthe building,
I think they could probably manage putting the drive-through in there without having this
thing deferred again. To me, if they came in and had the sign up towards the front, and then
the pick up window maybe back in the right hand corner, to me that would be feasible. I can't
speak for Hoggard Eure as far as the architects, but Ray has been pretty good about working
things out with what you all wanted, so I don't see why that would be an issue. I think he is
pretty good about that. I really do.
Janice Anderson: Are there any other questions?
Joseph Strange: You're talking about putting the window in the back, right in that back
corner right there?
Brian Murden: Yes.
II
III
Item #24
Attom Donuts, Inc.
Page 9
Joseph Strange: Yeah. I think that is a better idea.
Brian Murden: Well just for the fact that you would flow right out onto Baltic Avenue. It
would be easier.
Joseph Strange: And you wouldn't have the stack up problem we're talking about.
Brian Murden: I just want to see all those little green dots on one side today.
Janice Anderson: He's been watching it. Go ahead Gene.
Eugene Crabtree: Basically then what you would do would enclose that sidewalk someway
so that you had a passageway that come from up front back there and your drive in window
then would be back there.
Brian Murden: They need the space for that I think that would.
Eugene Crabtree: Just enclose the sidewalk and have a passageway back there and a window
at the rear.
Brian Murden: I don't think it would have to be roof line. It wouldn't have to be a bearing
wall. I mean I'm not an architect, but I got some pretty good ideas.
Eugene Crabtree: If you did that you could also make it aesthetically pleasant to look at, if
you enclose that sidewalk and did that.
Brian Murden: I would think so. For instance, the Wendy's over on 20th did something.
They have the glass inside that looks nice. It's fast food but drive-through. It has been there
for ages.
Janice Anderson: Are there any other questions for Mr. Murden. Thank you very much.
Brian Murden: I'm no relation to the other Mr. Murden.
Eugene Crabtree: But are you related to the gentleman that owned the appliance store.
Brian Murden: Yes I am. Thank you. He's a good man.
Eugene Crabtree: I did business on a handshake with him.
Brian Murden: That is the way we always did it. Thank you.
Donald Horsley: Okay. We have Jack Pope in opposition.
Item #24
Attom Donuts, [nc.
Page 10
Jack Pope: Somehow I feel that the opposition is swimming up hill here. And I'm sorry to
hear that because I've been waiting for three hours to give you some heartfelt comments
about what I think ought to happen here, or what I would like to see happen. I'm Jack Pope.
I live at 214 44th Street, so I'll speak to you as a resident of the area, and I'm also one ofthe
managing partners in the Old Beach Development just around the corner, so I have a hundred
million dollar investment down there too, that I feel that I need to speak for. As a resident on
44th Street, I have a lot of pride in the Beach, and I have a lot of, I think, understanding of
how important the Beach is to the City of Virginia Beach. I'm a volunteer with the Virginia
Beach Vision. I'm not speaking for them, but I wrote a little piece of paper for them a while
back on this. The Beach, to the world, the Beach at Virginia Beach is Virginia Beach to the
world. This is one of the five gateways into the Beach, by five or six east west gateways into
the beach. And, I'm not very proud of what I see on, I don't mean to insult Mr. Murden or
anybody else who is an owner on that street, but I'm not very proud of what I see there. One
of my neighbors is Kerry Dougherty. She has written about how there is no blight at the
Beach, but I've tried to get her into my car and take her down the street, and show her what I
think is an embarrassment to us in some cases. Sometimes I'm there every day, and I'm
embarrassed by some of the looks ofthe place. But from the owner's standpoint, and being
an owner in the area, my concern is that this needs to be a gateway to the Beach, and that to
me is something else. Now, from a developers standpoint, I was, five or six years ago, sold
on the concept and very much.
Janice Anderson: I'm going to give you more time. You've been here for three hours Mr.
Pope.
Jack Pope: I appreciate that. I've never been accused of simplifying anything, and so I
apologize for the length of this presentation. But I will make it as short as I can, but from a
developer's standpoint, I was sold by Jim Spore, Bob Scott, the four horsemen, the
Apocalypse, the gang of four. I can't remember which one they would refer to as, to what
they vision was for that area. And it was an urban village. An urban village is totally
different than what we are talking about here, an urban village, as you all know, as well or
better than I do, it's an edge along the street. It's a mixed use type of development. It's a lot
ofliving on that street, a lot of people walking on that street. If you look at what's down
there now, and spend anytime there, you will see that it is not a pedestrian friendly place.
There have been a lot of people that have been sold on this concept of an urban development
as a gateway to the Beach. I think we are going to see more of it on 19th Street. I think we're
going to seem more of it on 1 ih Street. I think we're going to see it on Norfolk A venue. I
think we ought to see it on 31 st Street. My feeling is that this ought to be a mixed use
development that we could take pride in like Duke of Gloucester Street in Williamsburg,
which is an icon for that city. There have been others that have been sold on this
commitment. I think you all know that PHR is planning a 60 million dollar development at
the other end ofthe street from the property we are discussing, at Pacific and 31 st Street.
And, that is going to be all about mixed use. It is all going to be about apartments, about four
and five stories. It is all going to be about retail on the street. Hopefully, retaining some of
those wonderful retailers, who are down there now, unique retailers, who are down there
now. I see at least two other developers, that I'm aware of, who have designed their
III
Item #24
Attom Donuts, Inc.
Page 11
programs between Arctic and Pacific to be parking, and putting it underneath the building,
putting it behind the building, getting the cars off the street. And Farm Fresh, quite frankly, I
give credit to. I spoke with Ron Dennis as he was getting that project together. It is at least
an edge on Laskin Road. It begins to create that sense of edge. I do know how you can
create an edge on many sides of the property. We're trying to dot that as we go along with
our further fillings at Old Beach Village. But, at Farm Fresh, I think they done a rather
lovely job of creating an entrance at that three sided site. I understand the reasons why
people, and I've talked to some people about a drive-through and a Dunkin Donuts there.
Now, I'm not opposed to donuts. You can take one look at me and see that I spent some time
at a donut shop. But, we've got an ordinance that says that there aren't any drive-throughs
east of Bird neck Road and south of 35th Street and north of Winston-Salem Road, down at
the south end of Rudee Inlet. Frankly, I would love for this to be built somewhere north of
35th Street. That would be a lot closer to my house. And, I would be happy to have it
between 35th and 44th Street. And at the same time, my friends who say that like to be able to
drive in and grab a donut, we do have a bakery at Farm Fresh. We do have a bakery at Harris
Teeter. We do have a bakery at Fresh Market. We do the Sugar Plum Bakery just up the
street past Birdneck. So, I can find my donuts. I think it is time for us to take a long term
view now, not a short term expedient view. The Beach doesn't necessarily have a reputation
for a long term view, but I think that is unjustified frankly. Where would we be without
some of the long term decision, that have been made such as, the initial annexing of Princess
Anne County, might be taken into consideration, or, where would we be if we hadn't found a
way to finance the widening of the boardwalk, the building of the seawall, the improvements
including landscaping to the Boardwalk, all the changes on Atlantic A venue, and I think we
would be suffering frankly. So, what I'm asking for now is on a total different level than
what you have all been discussing about where to put a drive-in. Where to put a drive-
through? Where to put the landscaping? Where the coffee is served? You know that kind of
thing. This site can create an edge, and it doesn't have to be three-four stories tall. I agree
that you have to work with what you've got but it can be built in terms of an edge and
creating an edge on that street. I would like to see that happen. So, I would like to do the
appropriate thing for the site in creating that edge, and at least giving this long term view a
chance on that street rather than what might be considered by some short sighted. Thank you
for all the time.
Janice Anderson: Thank you Mr. Pope.
Jack Pope: I appreciate it.
Janice Anderson: Jay Bernas has a question.
Jay Bernas: Actually, I don't have a question for Mr. Pope. I would like to ask staff a
question prior to rebuttal.
Janice Anderson: Okay.
Jack Pope: Did you want me to sit down?
Item #24
Attom Donuts, Inc.
Page 12
Janice Anderson: Yes.
Jay Bernas: I think if it's appropriate to ask staff a question prior to rebuttal, that it is
appropriate since staff is recommending denial that they give us the context. I know Jack has
provided us with a couple of sheets of paper showing some renderings and what the blocks
are going to look like, but I think it is appropriate for staff to kind of give us the big picture,
talk about the RFP that was just recently awarded for 32nd Street, and talk about how the
traffic is going to articulate. And give us the big picture view. And talk about the denial.
Jack Whitney: I'll be happy to Mr. Bernas. I think we have some images that you had
requested to see" some images that flowed from some of the plans and studies that have been
developed for the area. This first one is from the Sasaki plan that was adopted by City
Council just a few months ago. That shows the corridor and just some massing. We don't
plan on painting all the buildings red. It does show relationships, and the new image and
function of 31 st Street as it runs through there. That is a streetscape image of what 31 st Street
could look like with wider sidewalks, more vitality on the sidewalks, outdoor cafes,
landscaping, and a reduction in the dependence of the automobile through that corridor. This
is a depiction of the plan, what we would call the "District," that would be formed between
30th Street and 32nd Street. You will see a roundabout creating iconic gateway, a sense of
arrival. And, then through the middle of the district there would be the new image of 31 st
Street, which would remove existing parking, narrow it in terms of a lane. Introduce again,
the wider sidewalks, setbacks up closer to the street rather: than further back. Landscaping
planters, again outdoor activity as you might see here. One thing about long term plans, or
long term visions, is they tend to attract a lot of short term interest, whether you look at and
develop a vision, That tends to stimulate investment in the short term. As was the case in
Town Center, th!~ same case in Princess Anne Commons. We now have an adopted long
term vision or visions for Burton Station. That is already started to attract interest. This
particular area, the Laskin Road Gateway, is one of three primary districts that the Resort
Area Strategic Action Plan calls for. Of the three, this one is a lot farther along in terms of
actually happening. We've got Kimley Horn, a very fine, highly regarded transportation
engineering and planning firm, engaged to do analysis of how this district with a
reconfigured street network can function. That work is underway right now. As Mr. Pope
represented, we've got private development, multiple million dollars, to make something
happen that would stimulate new development in addition to that right along this corridor.
These developers are planning to build to the vision. And, that is what is exciting. You hear
them characterize this as long term, but when a vision is adopted and can be articulated to
landowners and private developers and investors they get a lot more excited about it. They
see how it's going to make their property more valuable. It's going to protect them. Their
investment will he made in context with others around it. Everybody will set a new standard
of quality, and we find that whenever we're doing these visions good things happen in fairly
quick order, as opposed to areas to where we don't have as well articulated visions, we find
that redevelopment, development, renovation whatever you call it happens at a much slower
pace. We're focusing infrastructure investments that the city is going to make. We've
engaged in the cooperation of a number of private developers who see the vision and want to
build to it in this particular area of the Oceanfront. It's poised to quickly begin a renaissance.
III
II
III
Item #24
Attom Donuts, Inc.
Page 13
And the plans that have been done, whether it's the Comprehensive Plan or the Sasaki plan
for this whole area, the Resort Area Strategic Action Plan, the Laskin Road Gateway Plan
and others that are under development right now, are really going to make it happen a lot
sooner than you might see in some of the other areas of the resort area. So, that's sort of the
context Mr. Bernas. I hope these images give you a little bit of a feel for what's
contemplated in that particular area and we think is all very exciting. I would have to say
that I compliment Hoggard Eure and the property owners and Dunkin Donuts and their
willingness to work a lot with the staff on site plan related enhancements to the property.
And, additional ones they agreed to look into as result of input from the Planning
Commission. And, we commend that. We really appreciate it. However, in the analysis and
implementation of this vision, we just don't feel comfortable recommending in favor of a
drive-through facility in the middle of this vision which would run contrary to what we are
trying to do in terms of creating a more pedestrian friendly environment with less emphasis
on the automobile, particularly on 31 st Street.
Janice Anderson: Jay?
Jay Bernas: Just correct me if I'm wrong? There is a bout 12 million dollars in the CIP
approved by City Council for the 31 st and 32nd Street?
Jack Whitney: I believe that is correct.
Janice Anderson: Go ahead Henry.
Henry Livas: I have another question. Would you say if we were to approve this that would
mean these other business leaders you're talking about with the large projects wouldn't think
they were serious our own visions?
Jack Whitney: I have a hard time speculating on what their reaction might be to this. It is
not a major piece of property. But it is a strategically located piece of property, and I think
the legitimacy and the will to build to the plan might suffer a bit.
Janice Anderson: Are there any other questions? Go ahead AI.
Ai Henley: I don't have a question I have a comment. Many years ago there was a vision,
and I guess it was part by the railroad company, that there was a piece of sandbar at the
Oceanfront of Virginia and it would be named Virginia Beach. And that development
corporation had great dreams, and they came to Virginia Beach and invested millions of
dollars. Eventually the Princess Anne Motel and the Cavalier came, and then around 1929
we fell on some hard times. And that became an end to that. In kind of relates to what we're
going through now. We're going through some economic times, trying times that is, and
we're trying to eco living. We, meaning business investors, citizens and even Council. In
those great dreams they had park avenues, they had parks, and waterways to travel. A great
insight and there is nothing wrong about dreaming. I think we all need to have a dream to
make reality come to throughout. I guess the point I'm trying to get at is that the applicant,
Item #24
Attom Donuts, Inc.
Page 14
his forefathers, his grandfather and his father, also had a dream. They not only lived here but
they invested wisely. They have made a decent living in Virginia Beach. Virginia Beach, as
well as any neighborhood, and I see Virginia Beach, as the gentleman said earlier, the
Virginia Beach Oceanfront. We all have blight. But I can tell you right now I am amazed
and very pleased with the virtually millions and millions of dollars, taxpaying dollars that the
City of Virginia Beach has invested in, not only on the Boardwalk, Pacific Avenue and other
areas at the Oceanfront. I'm very happy with that. And hopefully Virginia Beach will be
prosperous in the future, and we can now see all neighborhoods deal away with blight. I
think anytime a City, municipality grows, you're going to have blight. And the reason for
that is because everyone doesn't have the resources of the big time investors. We're going to
be dealing with property owners that have been here for many generations. You're going to
be dealing with new property owners that come in here for wise investment, hoping that their
dreams will come true. We have a piece of property here. Some people may consider it a
blight. And it is unoccupied. It may be outdated. But we have an opportunity here or at
least the city does as well as the property owner to increase the value of that property
dramatically. To increase the assessment on it so the city will eventually benefit. It provides
additional employment where now none exists. It provides additional sales tax on that
property where none exists. It is a large investment for that particular company to come in,
and I think they did, in my opinion, a great job in trying best they can do to make it workable
for the City of Virginia Beach even though the property already has some commitment on
funds. You read the morning paper, those funds are being compromised just to let employees
remain in their positions. They are asking the employees to take leave without pay. Once
again, we're facing an economic trying time. This whole company and the world is at this
particular time. I think the only thing that we're looking at, at least from my perspective is
can this system really work? Can this one small little application really be the straw that
breaks the camel back on all of the Oceanfront? I think not. That is my humble opinion.
I'm going to be supporting this application and hopefully the applicant can come back,
redraw the plan, go back and work with staff, and also to relocate the drive-through window
in a more suitable location. I think they did a great job in trying to work with staff to meet
the demands of the landscaping, and I think that is wonderful. Hopefully, some more seating
out front can be accommodated. So, there is always a workable solution. And, I've always
taken the position that I would do my best to try to see the applicant's position, walk in his
shoes for a mile, which I have always done and sit back and say "is this really for the benefit
of the city or is it just going to be the straw that breaks the camel's back." So, with that said
and taking a little bit of time, and I apologize but I'm giving you my view points and my
opinions and I will be supporting this application. Thank you.
Janice Anderson: Thank you AI. Go ahead Jay?
Jay Bernas: Is this discussion, or are we going to time for rebuttal?
Janice Anderson: Do you want to come back up? I totally forgot.
C.l. Bodnar: I don't have a huge amount to add.
II
III
Item #24
Attom Donuts, Inc.
Page 15
Janice Anderson: Okay.
C.J. Bodnar: I agree with Mr. Henley. I don't think this is going to be the straw that breaks
your development at the Oceanfront's back. You're talking about one parcel. You're talking
about one parcel that is going to have a drive-through, that the Resort Advisory Committee
has already said that they recommended approval on it. And they are not going to make a
recommendation for approval on any drive-through other than the two you are hearing today.
They have already said that. I mean, we are not talking about millions of dollars for
investment on this property, but we are talking about doing the best with what is available to
do. Weare willing to go ahead and proffer that we will move the drive-through. We will get
with staff, and get them new drawings before it goes to Council meeting to put conditions on
that. We will remove two of the parking spaces at the front to create a larger green along the
front for a seating area. We'll proffer those right now. The biggest thing for Mr. Murden's
sake is that right now we're scheduled to go to Council on February 24th. If you all defer us
for 30 days, he really doesn't have a valid lease at that point in time because he is supposed
to start getting money on March 1 st. We really need to have a decision, and we'll do whatever
conditions we need to do to make this happen today.
Janice Anderson: Thank you. Are there any questions of Mr. Bodnar now? Thank you. I'll
open it back up for discussion now. Gene?
Eugene Crabtree: I got one clarification with Mr. Murden. Mr. Murden, if I understood
right, you indicated that you did not look at this as a real long term project that was going to
impede any of the future growth of Laskin Road. Did I understand you right?
Brian Murden: As far as our lease goes?
Eugene Crabtree: Yes sir, as far as your lease goes? If this goes through now you did not
foresee this as something that was so long term that it would prevent the future growth of
Laskin Road.
Brian Murden: Well, in all honesty, I have been to quite a few events that show different
plans that the City has had over the last five plus years on this whole project from 30th Street
to Laskin. 32nd Street has just come into the picture recently as far as what I've seen. I mean
I have seen Laskin Road from everything from a cobblestone street to trolley lanes, horse and
buggy. It's been a horse and pony show at times because it has changed so often. I really
like the view. I don't like it having my block on Laskin Road as a park, but that could
always change, I'm sure, too. I cannot really see your average tourist walking from the
Boardwalk. If I'm going on vacation, I'm going to stay on the Boardwalk. I'm not going to
come five blocks into the city. Maybe if it was ever to this category, somebody might come
into the 400 block. I just don't see them walking down to Farm Fresh very often. There is a
handful that will. I don't think this is going to happen in a ten year period. I mean if Bruce
Thompson does the deal over across from where Beach Gallery is, Old Roses, Colonial
Stores, or Heritage and Rite-Aid, basically that doesn't start until next year, minimal. They
say it is going to take a year to build. I'll believe it when I see it. That is going to take two
Item #24
Attom Donuts, Inc.
Page 16
years probably, three years, I would think in the long run. And then they are going to have to
go to another block. They still got a lot oflandowners to deal with, and they're talking about
where I am on the other side of the little Isle of Capri. For all of you that have been out here
for a while. And, to get down to where we are, I think our lease is going to be over and done
with by the time you get that far, in all honesty. I know you say it is going to happen
quickly. I saw 30th Street. I saw how quick that happened. We were told that you have to
close in three months. Bon Air lost a lot of business because they closed Baltic forever, and
then they closed 30th Street. I can't imagine how many months it was now. Luckily, I had a
front entrance to my store so I was not affected as much as other people were. So, that is
basically where I'm coming from. I don't think it is going to come that far down that
quickly. I don't think our little parcel is going to affect, like they said, it is not going to break
the camel's back by any means. They are going to a nice job. They are going to have a nice
building. They are. a good franchise. I think it will do nothing but enhance the city. I'm
sorry to hear what Mr. Pope said. He called me months ago saying what am I going to do, it's
an eyesore after the fire. I said with insurance it takes time. It is a hard situation. If he
wants to cut down places, that's fine. I'm not thrilled with his. I would like to see some big
Leyland cypress trees between him and Harris Teeter, as far as not making it look so bad
from the back of those apartments, because those are an eyesore. But everybody sees things
differently. And, I think and that's the beauty of this world, everybody has their own
opinions. I just hope you can see the merit in what I'm seeing today. Thank you.
Janice Anderson: Thank you Mr. Murden. Go ahead Jay.
Jay Bernas: Are we discussion?
Janice Anderson: Yes.
Jay Bernas: Personally, and I may be in the minority, I think we need to hold to the vision. I
think, you got a developer, Jack Pope, he has invested a hundred million dollars in this area,
and part of making this pedestrian friendly is that it is not about tourists anymore. It is going
to be a year round destination, and part of that is building residential, and building that mixed
use so you can create that pedestrian environment. I think the City has spent million of
dollars developing these plans, 30th Street is already done. The garage is done. The Hilton is
done. Old Beach Village is well underway that in my mind, this doesn't. I don't see this
Dunkin Donuts matching with what the vision for this corridor is. They got the engineer on
RFP to design this area. I just think from a Planning Commission standpoint, we need to
show some leadership. Stick to the vision and go with the plan that we developed. We've
got two applications in front of us. They're both proposing drive-throughs. They both not
consistent with the plan, and in my mind, I think we need to stick with the vision that we
have set forth, b{~cause I think it shows leadership from a Planning Commission standpoint,
that we're into looking at this one little parcel. We're looking at the big picture. We're
looking at the strategic growth areas holistically as opposed one little postage stamp at a
time. I'm not in favor of it. I may be in the minority, but it is just that I feel pretty strongly
about this that when we develop these visions and we spend all this money and time with
II'
II
III
Item #24
Attorn Donuts, Inc.
Page 17
these strategic growth areas, but we're not willing to stand firm and implement the vision It
is almost like a waste of time. What are we doing?
Janice Anderson: Henry?
Henry Livas: I agree with you Jay. We talk about waste oftime. All of us were on
subcommittees and all that. We studied these things, and we come up with conclusions.
We've come up with nice booklets. But now we are going to get to the point that we are not
going to even follow them. These two projects that are coming up now, they violate the
Comprehensive Plan, the Oceanfront Resort Area Plan, and Resort Area Strategic Plan. That
is a lot of things to be violating for us just to look at and pass it on it and not take it seriously.
So, the bad thing about it is the timing on this because the Strategic Plan was just approved in
2008. So, we're at the beginning of not giving it chance. We should at least let some time
expire before we start significantly deviating from it. So, I do not support it, either one!
Janice Anderson: Go ahead Joe.
Joseph Strange: Well, I have to agree with both of these speakers. I've looked this thing
over. I've thought it over. I hate to mess with somebody else's money, and somebody else's
business being a small business man myself. I think the City does have a vision, and I don't
think this fits into the vision. I would hope that the vision the City has is successful. I think it
is successful, I think that piece of property will be worth of money, and I think there are
going to be a lot of customers walking into that place, spend lots on donuts, lots of coffee. I
think it would probably be more successful than it would ever be with a drive-through
window, but that is just my opinion. Of course, I have no way of really knowing that, but I
think we all have to vote our conscience, and I hope the applicant would understand that. I
surely don't mean him any harm, but I do have to vote my conscience, and I think going
against the vision that the city has would be going against my conscience.
Janice Anderson: Since it's going this way, I'll go next. I agree with the plan that you have.
I've been with the resort plan for awhile. I'm excited about the plan, but I understand that
plan is based on assembly of property, and you are not always going to get that. This is one
lot here. A lot of times you can't get everything that you envision in a plan, but you're trying
to get the best out of the plan that you can. They want to use the exiting building here.
They're not tearing it down. They are not bringing it all the way up to the front where you
are going to have parcels like this in the Oceanfront area. What I believe is this is probably
the best because there is an investment on this property. It is going to look a heck of a lot
better than it is now. We pick what we can to improve the area and have the plan go forward.
The main thing is the streetscape, to keep that open, and that's one ofthe things that I've
asked the applicant to go back and increase that, and remove most of that parking up front
and make it a big seating area, to make it more of a plaza area. So, that it does fit into our
plan. They've agreed to match all the paving and the lighting and the planting that has
already gone on 31 sl Street, so that is matching it, too. I don't want it to sit out like sore
thumb. It doesn't meet all the criteria of our plan, but I think it does a dam good job of
fitting in. The other thing is the improvements to the building. The elevations, and I don't
Item #24
Attom Donuts, Inc.
Page 18
have any real problem with that, and taking down that old Golden Skillet sign that wasn't
originally there. They are going to take that down and put a new monument sign. With the
drive-through, I do believe Dunkin Donuts would probably want this drive-through here. It
is going to be one window drive-through, and they have agreed to place it in the back, to
keep up to Farm Fresh, right next door to it. And, if they place it in the back with the menu
board on the one side, I think you prevent any negativity with the drive-through there. I
believe this is a good development. It is an improvement in this area, and I think you will get
other improvements. I don't think it takes away. Like Jack Pope has done on the lofts in
Beach Village there is beautiful. I don't think this takes away from it. I'm sure he should be
welcoming improvements on this corner. I would be in favor of this application with those
extra requirements.
Donald Horsley Okay. It comes my time. I appreciate the vision too, but I'm going to have
to side with what Madame Chairman is talking. I look at it from a small business man's
point of view. These people are sitting here with this piece of property and they need to do
something with it. If they can improve the property and make it amenable to what RAC has
said they could support as possible. I'll even go one step further. I think you need to get rid
of all four of them parking spaces out front. You do that and you may get my vote. But then
help start that streetscape atmosphere that we got in these pictures here that everybody has
seen. I think you can do that, it might help that alot in heading in that direction. And as Mr.
Murden says it is probably going to take 10 years. His contract may be up by then and
something more grandiose then what we have now may be there. But they are willing to
work with us. It is going to be a big improvement on that piece of property. It will start
generating some revenue for the owners, and the City also. I think right now, I'm going to
have to support it especially if we can get rid of those other two parking spaces. I may be
willing to support it with those conditions.
Janice Anderson: Do you have anything?
Philip Russo: Just real quickly. I always wrestle with property owner's right to do what to
do with their property versus what the City's vision is. In this case, I feel that the property
owner's rights here to develop this property is important, especially from what I gathered
they have had some trouble finding the right development for this property, and it has been a
while. To ask them to forsake that to make the city's vision, there is just too much of a
question as to when all of this is going to take place. I'm also not sure in practice that it is
going to be a bit of a problem when the City's plan is implemented as we think it will be. As
Al mentioned, it is a drive-through. I don't think it is going to jeopardize the overall
development of the project as much as everyone is concerned. So, I am going to support the
application.
Ronald Ripley: If the city or somebody owned all of this land you could easily develop it
just like it shown. It is beautiful and that's a vision for us to work towards. And I agree with
the vision. I think what's worked out. I've been to tons ofthese meetings and participated in
them. It is just that, a vision. And because of that vision it elevates the discussion of quality
and design guidelines and all the things that were talked about here today. I thought that plan,
Iii
II
III
Item #24
Attom Donuts, Inc.
Page 19
we wouldn't be addressing things like streetscapes and how that ties in with your overall
plan. Because what you have is a lot of people, like Mr. Murden, has owned the property
forever, and you got a lot of other people down there. There are a lot of little pieces that are
a little big larger, in some cases, and a lot of little pieces. You can't go out and control these
pieces of property. I mean, we don't have a housing authority suggesting anything like that
all. If you got the ability to do that today maybe that would be something that would be
different. But the color of my thinking, if that was the case, but in this case, I am like Don.
If you can do that streets cape, pull the quality and design guidelines into play like has been
represented here, and move the drive aisle over to the other side like we talked about. That is
where I'm going.
Eugene Crabtree: I just think that by the time we get to where we are really going to develop
it for our vision, and to have the street the way we envisioned it in the future, I think it is
going to be far enough down the pike that the donut shop may not even exist by that time
anyway. I think it may be long gone by the time we get around to developing this corridor
the way that we want it. I would like to see it, and I hope that it happens in my lifetime, but I
don't think that it is going to be quite that quick. So, I'm going to support this application
because I think it's the best thing for right now.
Janice Anderson: Is there anybody else? Do I have a motion? Mr. Bodnar? You heard Mr.
Horsley. He wants the other two.
Donald Horsley: The way I look at it you show the intention that you are willing to go that
extra mile to get the streetscape like the pictures that envision would be. That is the way I
see that thing.
C.J. Bodnar: Mr. Horsley, I will tell you that I'm fairly confident that I can convince my
client to eliminate two of them. I can probably get him to eliminate three ofthem. I will do
everything that I can to get him to eliminate al four of those parking spaces, but I can't
guarantee you that without talking to him. Like I said, I will do everything in my powers to
eliminate all of them, do the streetscape as all of you have asked.
Ronald Ripley: What about we include that.
Janice Anderson: Yes, as a condition.
Ronald Ripley: He has to try to work that out at Council.
Janice Anderson: That is what I was thinking. Thank you
Ronald Ripley: I would be appreciative if the staff would come up with the conditions. I
understand the recommendation. Have you done that Jack, in the past where you had
conditions?
Item #24
Attom Donuts, ][nc.
Page 20
Jack Whitney: ][ think we have been taking very good notes today based on the discussion.
We can have a draft ofthe conditions, as we understand your intent, and have them ready for
Council.
Janice Anderson: If you make a motion, I'll review what we've discussed.
Donald Horsley: You can review, it staff will develop those conditions.
Ronald Ripley: I really wasn't prepared to do the motion but I'll give it a shot.
Janice Anderson: You can start and we'll add to it.
Ronald Ripley: Okay. I'll make a motion that we approve the application that it be subject
to the site plan that has been submitted, whatever date the site plan is.
Janice Anderson: January 5,2009.
Ronald Ripley: Subject to the modification of dedicating the parking along Laskin Road to
additional streetscape design to the satisfaction of the staff. That the drive-through be
reversed and located on the other side of the building with the location on the southeast
comer.
Eugene Crabtree:: Southwest.
Ronald Ripley: Southwest?
Janice Anderson: Just put located on the rear of the building. It could be on the rear corner
but the rear. Just say rear.
Ronald Ripley: That the sign be removed as proposed. Is there something else?
Janice Anderson: That all the development along Baltic Avenue and Laskin Road would
compliment the current streetscapes, the paving design, the plantings design, the lighting
design, and the e:limination of the four parking spaces up front to get a plaza seating and
plaza walk through development. I think that does it. See, you did better than you thought.
Donald Horsley: I'll second it.
Janice Anderson: We have a motion by Ron and a second Don Horsley.
David Redmond: I will be abstaining. Thank you.
AYE 6
NAY 3
ABSl
ABSENT 1
ANDERSON AYE
II
III
Item #24
Attom Donuts, Inc.
Page 21
BERNAS NAY
CRABTREE AYE
HENLEY AYE
HORSLEY AYE
KA TSIAS ABSENT
LIV AS NAY
REDMOND ABS
RIPLEY AYE
RUSSO AYE
STRANGE NAY
Ed Weeden: By a vote of6-3, with the abstention so noted, the application of Attom Donuts,
Inc. have been approved with the modifications as stated.
Janice Anderson: Thank you.
II
III
BURGER KING
Relevant Information:
· Beach District
· The applicant proposes to demolish the existing building and to
construct a new drive-through restaurant.
· AICUZ is 70-75.
Evaluation and Recommendation:
· Planning Staff recommended denial
· Planning Commission recommends approval (6-3-1).
· There was opposition.
II
III
,{#J1.~~>l~.. .~_~_'1%
~ -\f'
(5: . - ~~'lY~
~. I..... . .)
-..\~-"'. lJ)
0:',: J' {;'
'i.. "'.41
\.~.:;;:..,
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: BURGER KING CORPORATION, Conditional Use Permit (eating and
drinking establishment with drive-through facilities), 524 Laskin Road. BEACH
DISTRICT.
MEETING DATE: February 24,2009
. Background:
A Burger King restaurant with a drive-through currently occupies the site. The
applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit to allow redevelopment of the site
for a new Burger King restaurant with drive-through. The existing drive-through
facility is nonconforming as it was constructed before the City Zoning Ordinance
required a Conditional Use Permit for drive-through facilities. The Zoning
Ordinance was amended in 2005 to require all drive-through facilities within the
RT-3 Resort Tourist District to obtain a Conditional Use Permit.
. Considerations:
The site was developed in 1970 as a Carroll's Restaurant. The applicant
proposes to completely renovate the existing site by demolishing the building and
parking areas and building a new restaurant with drive-through facilities, new
parking lot, and adding landscaping. The applicant proposes to make the
improvements in two phases. The existing Burger King drive-through facility will
remain in operation while the new restaurant is constructed. Once completed the
existing drive-through will be demolished and the proposed parking and
landscaping will be installed.
One of the guiding principles of the Oceanfront Resort Area Plan, adopted in
2005, is to create resort area gateways that are attractive, provide a sense of
arrival, and direct visitors to places where they can park their cars and use other
transportation methods. The Laskin Road Gateway, as defined in the Oceanfront
Resort Area Plan, is located along Laskin Road from Little Neck Creek to Pacific
Avenue and along portions of Baltic Avenue, 29th Street, and 30th Street, and
consists of a mix of commercial uses, most of which are small shops and
restaurants. Tracts of undeveloped or underutilized land are located within the
area, offering significant opportunities for the development of a major resort-
based activity center.
The Laskin Road Gateway is to be improved so that it accomplishes the following
three objectives. First, Laskin Road, 30th Street, and 31st Street must be able to
direct traffic entering from the west to parking garages where cars can be parked
Burger King
Page 2 of 3
and individuals can easily transition to a pedestrian or transit mode. Second, the
streetscapes on these roadways must afford safe, pleasant, and convenient
pedestrian access between Baltic Avenue and the Boardwalk while also
providing an enhanced shopping experience for those pedestrians through the
use of interesting storefront displays, cafes, and similar activities. Finally, all
improvements along this corridor must exhibit exceptional design quality, as
express'ed in the Resort Area Design Guidelines.
The applicant's proposal to redevelop the site for a new restaurant with a drive-
through facility is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan recommendations
for the area, the Laskin Road Gateway Design Guidelines, or the Oceanfront
Resort Area Plan. Staff compared the submitted site development plans and
building elevations to the criteria listed in the Laskin Road Gateway Overlay
District, the design goals of the Laskin Road Gateway Design Guidelines, and
the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan recommendations and the Oceanfront
Resort Area Concept Plan, and finds the request does not meet the stated
criteria and goals of the adopted ordinances and guidelines. The request does
little to further exceptional quality development in the area and to enhance
pedestrian facilities and activities within this corridor. Moreover, in December
2008, the City Council adopted the Resort Area Strategic Action Plan (RASAP),
which recommends that development within this corridor be urban in form, with
the building mass located adjacent to the sidewalk and roadway and parking
located within the block, behind the buildings.
The applicant's proposal is not consistent with RASAP. The applicant proposes
to redev,elop the existing building and site, which is of a suburban design, into a
restaurant with a drive-through facility following the same suburban model. While
the restaurant is an acceptable use for this area and would complement the area,
the submitted design is oriented to automobiles, lacking in pedestrian-friendly
concept~). As envisioned in both approved planning policy for this corridor and
detailed planning currently under development, the vision for the Laskin Road
Gateway is of pedestrian oriented uses, consisting of buildings positioned at the
right-of-way line, wide sidewalks, cafes and seating areas, and parking behind
the buildings (or at the public parking facility at 30tll Street).
. Recommendations:
The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 6-3 with 1
abstention to approve this request with the following conditions:
1, The site shall be developed substantially in accordance with the
submitted site plan entitled "BURGER KING, 524 LASKIN ROAD,
VIRGINIA BEAC, VIRGINIA", prepared by Hoggard-Eure Associates,
P.C., and dated 10-XX-2008 except:
a. The Laskin Road streetscape shall be re-designed to reflect
the street design of the recently completed CIP # 2-076 30th
II
III
Burger King
Page 3 of 3
Street Laskin Road Gateway. This includes paving design,
plantings, street lighting, and site furnishings.
b. The western side of the proposed building may ultimately
become the predominately viewed side when 32nd Street is
connected to Laskin Road west of the property. The planting
design for the western side of the property shall be enhanced
to appropriately reduce the mass and scale to the western
side of the building to the public. The applicant shall work with
the Current Planning Division of the Planning Department to
design an appropriate landscape plan for the western side of
the site.
c. The excess proposed parking over the minimum parking
requirement shall be eliminated along the Laskin Road
frontage. The groups of four (4) parking spaces along the
eastern side and interior portion of the site and the eastern
side of the building shall be eliminated and replaced with
landscaping and site furnishings such as seating areas and
benches.
Said plan has been exhibited to the City of Virginia Beach City Council
and is on file in the Planning Department. Modifications to the plan
may be approved by the Planning Director to accommodate the items
listed above.
2. The architecture of the building shall be re-designed reflecting the
architectural elements of 31 Ocean (the Hilton Hotel at 31st Street and
Oceanfront) and the Old Beach Village (lofts and condominiums at
30th Street and Baltic Avenue).
3. The existing free-standing sign shall be removed. The applicant may
install a monument sign, no more than eight (8) feet in height, and
similar in design to the Farm Fresh supermarket sign south of the site.
. Attachments:
Staff Review
Disclosure Statement
Planning Commission Minutes
Location Map
Recommended Action: Staff recommends denial. Planning Commission recommends
approval.
Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department
~ k ' "'O<<1JI't.
l\f
City Manage .
#25
February 11, 2009 Public Hearing
APPLICANT I PROPERTY OWNER:
BURGER KING
STAFF PLANNER: Faith Christie
REQUEST:
Conditional Use Permit for drive-through facilities in conjunction with a restaurant
ADDRESS IIDESCRIPTION: 524 Laskin Road
GPIN:
2418911948
ELECTION DISTRICT:
BEACH
SITE SIZE:
41,271 square feet
AICUZ:
70-75 dB DNL
APPLICATION HISTORY: The application was deferred on January 14, 2009 at the request of the applicant.
The applicant met with the Resort Area Advisory Commission's Planning and Design Review Committee on
December 3, 2008 to discuss redevelopment of the site. The Planning and Design Review Committee offered
the following recommendations for site and building design that would complement the Laskin Road Gateway
Corridor:
1. The Laskin Road streetscape should be re-designed to reflect recently completed street design for
30th Street and 31 st Street from Atlantic Avenue to Pacific Avenue. This includes paving design,
proper sidewalk widths, plantings, street lighting, and site furnishings.
2. The planting design as proposed is more suburban and I or residential in nature and does not reflect
the planting designs recently installed in the 31 Ocean redevelopment areas. The planting does not
adequately screen the view of the parking from Laskin Road. A low continuous evergreen screening
hedg4:l is a minimum condition.
3. Consideration should be given to removing the excessive parking stalls within the proposed parking lot
thus creating more green space and a potential creation of an urban architectural edge incorporating
low masonry walls, plaza development, seating, and plantings.
4. The architecture of the building while in conformance with corporate standards does not reflect the
architecture of the resort redevelopment areas. Cultured stone and olive colored Exterior Finish
Insulation System (EFIS) are not in keeping with the resort style. A tour of the recently completed
Hilton, Ocean Beach Club, 17th Street Surf Shop, Turtle Cay, Inlet Fitness, and several of the more
recently completed or in progress oceanfront hotels may provide some guidance as to the contextual
design elements. We recommend that decorative block, quality brick, or EFIS with an accent color be
used in lieu of cultured stone as a veneer.
BURGER KING
Agenda Item 25
Page 1
III
5. It is important that the Burger King Corporation is made aware that the western elevation of the proposed
building may ultimately become the predominately viewed side of the building when 32nd Street is connected
to Laskin Road west of the property. With this in mind, the planting design for the western property line needs
to be enhanced to appropriately reduce the mass and scale to the western elevation to the viewing public.
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit to allow re-development of the site for drive-through
facilities in conjunction with a restaurant. The existing drive-through facility is nonconforming as it was
constructed before the City Zoning Ordinance required a Conditional Use Permit for drive-through
facilities. As specified in the City Zoning Ordinance "a nonconformity may continue provided that it
remains otherwise lawful, subject to the provisions set forth in this section. However, no nonconformity
shall continue if it ceases for any reason for a period of more than two (2) years". The Zoning Ordinance
was amended in 2005 to require all drive-through facilities within the RT-3 Resort Tourist District to obtain
a Conditional Use Permit. The ordinance also requires that the lot on which the use is located is at least
100 feet from any lot zoned Residential or Apartment; the lot to the rear of the site is zoned A-12
Apartment district. Section 221 (i) of the City Zoning Ordinance allows the City Council to approve a use
permit with such deficiencies if it is determined that the deficiencies are offset by the proposal or by
attached conditions that ensure the proposal is compatible to the surrounding area. The applicant
proposes to completely renovate the existing site by demolishing the building and parking areas and
building a new restaurant with drive-through facilities, new parking lot, and adding landscaping. The
applicant proposes to make the improvements in two phases. The existing Burger King drive-through
facility will remain in operation while the new restaurant is constructed. Once completed the existing drive-
through will be demolished and the proposed parking and landscaping will be installed.
The site was developed in 1970 as a Carroll's Restaurant. The existing restaurant is 75-feet from the
existing Laskin Road right-of-way, and 62-feet from the right-of-way for proposed improvements to the
roadway. The existing restaurant is 3,706 square feet, and there are 52 parking spaces on the site. The
proposed restaurant will be 2,563 square feet and will have 40 parking spaces on the site. The submitted
site plan depicts proposed landscaping in accordance with the Parking Lot and Foundation Landscaping
requirements and the Landscape Screening and Buffering Specifications and Standards.
While the site design is suburban in nature, the proposed building is more urban in design utilizing
building material of brick, cultured stone, Exterior Insulation Finish System (EIFS), metal coping, and
aluminum awnings.
LAND USE AND ZONING INFORMATION
EXISTING LAND USE: Burger King restaurant with drive-through facilities and associated parking,
SURROUNDING LAND
USE AND ZONING:
North
South
· Townhomes / A-12 Apartment
· Laskin Road
· Across Laskin Road is Farm Fresh / RT-3 Resort Tourist (LRG)
Laskin Road Gateway
· Garden center / RT-3 Resort Tourist (LRG) Laskin Road
Gateway
East
BURGER KING
Agenda Item 25
Page 2
West . Service Station / RT-3 Resort Tourist (LRG) Laskin Road
Gateway
NATURAL RESOURCE AND
CULTURAL FEATURES:
The site is mostly covered by building and asphalt, and is within the
Resource Management Area of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area.
There are no significant natural resources or cultural features associated
with the site.
IMPACT ON CITY SERVICES
MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN (MTPl I CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP): Laskin Road is
a four-lane urban arterial in front of this site. Laskin Road has a variable right-of-way width; the Master
Transportation Plan depicts an undivided highway with an ultimate right-of-way width of 88-feet. Capital
Improvement Program project (CIP) 2-143, Laskin Road Gateway Phase 1-A, is scheduled for this segment of
Laskin Road, The 30% design plans indicate a future right-of-way width of 80 feet for this portion of Laskin
Road.
The proposed sidewalk easement along the frontage of the site is not acceptable. A right-of-way dedication will
be required during detailed site plan review.
TRAFFIC: Street Name Present Present Capacity Generated Traffic
Volume
Laskin Road 29,515 ADT 1 27,300 ADT' Existing Land Use .t. - 1,836
ADT(196 AM / 129 PM)
Proposed Land Use 3 - No
ChanQe
1 Average Daily Trips
2 as defined by a fast-food restaurant with a drive-through
3 as defined bv a fast-food restaurant with a drive-through
WATER: This site is connected to City water. The existing 1.5-inch meter may be used or upgraded to
accommodatl9 the proposed development.
SEWER: This site is connected to City sanitary sewer. The applicant must provide an analysis of Pump
Station # 003 and the sanitary sewer collection system to ensure future flows can be accommodated
Recommendation:
Staff recommends denial of this
request.
EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION
Comprehensive Plan:
BURGER KING
Agenda Item 25
Page 3
II
III
One of the guiding principles of the Oceanfront Resort Area Plan, adopted in 2005, is to create resort
area gateways that are attractive, provide a sense of arrival, and direct visitors to places where they can
park their cars and use other transportation methods. Building upon this concept, Laskin Road Gateway
Overlay District, and the Resort Area Design Guidelines were adopted to provide guidance in the
development and redevelopment of properties and infrastructure along Laskin Road, also known as 31st
Street. Moreover, in December 2008, the City Council adopted the Resort Area Strategic Action Plan
(RASAP), which recommends that development within this corridor is to be urban in form, with the
building mass located adjacent to the sidewalk and roadway and parking located within the block, behind
the buildings.
The Laskin Road Gateway, as defined in the Oceanfront Resort Area Plan, is located along Laskin Road
from Little Neck Creek to Pacific Avenue and along portions of Baltic Avenue, 29th Street, and 30th
Street, and consists of a mix of commercial uses, most of which are small shops and restaurants. Tracts
of undeveloped or underutilized land are located within the area, offering significant opportunities for the
development of a major resort-based activity center.
The Laskin Road Gateway should be improved so that it accomplishes the following three objectives.
First, Laskin Road, 30th Street, and 31 st Street must be able to direct traffic entering from the west to
parking garages where cars can be parked and individuals can easily transition to a pedestrian or transit
mode. Second, the streetscapes on these roadways must afford safe, pleasant, and convenient
pedestrian access between Baltic Avenue and the Boardwalk while also providing an enhanced shopping
experience for those pedestrians through the use of interesting storefront displays, cafes, and similar
activities. Finally, all improvements along this corridor must exhibit exceptional design quality, as
expressed in the Resort Area Design Guidelines.
To accomplish the first objective, the recommendations of the Resort Area Design Guidelines should be
adhered to, particularly in regard to limiting vehicular access points along Laskin Road and 30th Street.
Conveniently located parking facilities, integrated into the buildings, should replace all on-street and
direct-access parking, such as those currently along Laskin Road east of Baltic Avenue. The second
objective can be accomplished by widening the storefront sidewalks on both sides of Laskin Road east of
Baltic Avenue and by improving 30th Street to match the improvements on Laskin Road. The third
objective can be achieved by designing eye-catching landscaping and streetscape treatment along Laskin
Road. Many of these recommendations are embodied in the design plans that have been developed for
roadway and streetscape improvements to this area as part of the Laskin Road Gateway Capital
Improvement Program (CIP) Project 2-076. This CIP Project, combined with the already adopted
amendments to the City Zoning Ordinance for the RT-3(LRG) Laskin Road Gateway and the
accompanying Design Guidelines, puts all of the ingredients in place to move this area forward to being
part of a First Class Resort.
Evaluation:
Laskin Road serves many roles. It is a major east-west urban arterial road serving the east central area of
the Resort and is also one of the four main entrance roads in the Resort. The portion of Laskin Road
between Little Neck Creek / Beach Garden Park and Atlantic Avenue has served the role of "gateway" to
what many visitors perceive to be "Virginia Beach." However, a second role of this stretch of Laskin Road
is that of a 'Main Street' for the thousands of residents and workers in the northern area of the
Oceanfront. The interplay of these two roles on this section of Laskin Road has resulted in a four-lane
arterial highway serving both local and long-distance traffic constricted by a variety of land uses on each
side, largely catering to the residents in the immediate area. Compounding these dual roles and the
tension between them is the changing role of the Oceanfront Resort itself and its future. The growing
prominence of the Oceanfront Resort Area as a highly desired tourist and convention destination is
affecting and will continue to affect the role of Laskin Road and thus, its design and land use character.
With the development of a high-quality, prominent hotel anchoring the terminus of Laskin Road (which
BURGER KING
Agenda Item 25
Page 4
becomes 31 st Street at that point), the role of this section of Laskin Road as not only a "gateway" but also
as an opportunity for higher quality and more intensive development is significant, as called for in the
Comprehensive Plan.
The Zoning Ordinance specifies that in the evaluation of a development or redevelopment proposal within
the Laskin Road Gateway, staff must use the following criteria found in Section 1521 (c) of the City
Zoning Ordinance to evaluate the proposal:
(c) Proposed conditional uses shall be evaluated for consistency with the following land use,
transportation. and aesthetic provisions in order to further the legislative intent of the RT -3 District and
the goals of the Comprehensive Plan and Oceanfront Resort Area Plan:
(1) Any development or redevelopment in this area should contribute to creating an attractive
wholesome family resort destination;
(2) The use should be consistent with the resort area goal to promote a safe, day and night, year
round resort destination;
(3) The use and structure should complement resort activity centers and corridors and advance
the area's public and private investments;
(4) All development and other physical improvements, such as landscaping, signs, lighting, and
other similar elements should strive to achieve a high level of design excellence and contribute to
a quality image as expressed in the Oceanfront Resort Area Design Guidelines;
(5) All transportation improvements should be designed to shift the dominant transportation
modE~ in the area from vehicular to pedestrian and transit; and
(6) The use should be appropriate for both local residents and visitors to the area.
Additionally, the proposed project must adhere to the following design goals found in the Laskin Road
Gateway Design Guidelines:
Desiqn Goal: Provide interest at the street level and enhance the pedestrian experience. Align a
building's front at the sidewalk (right-of-way) edge. Locate on-site parking to minimize visibility
from the sidewalk. Parking should not be located so that it interrupts the storefront continuity
alon~1 the sidewalk, Place on-site parking behind the buildings, either at-grade or within a parking
structure.
Desiqn Goal: Clearly identify the primary entrance to a building and orient it to the street. Orient
the primary entrances to the sidewalk and the primary pedestrian ways. Buildings located at the
intersection of roadways should be designed with angled entrances at the corner. Recessed
entries should be used in entrances at the corner. Use an awning, change in roofline, or other
archil:ectural feature to define the entrance. Special paving treatments may be used to define the
entry ..
DesiCln Goal: Design outdoor spaces to enliven the sidewalk level and provide for private open
spacE! for shoppers, employees, and residents. The linear frontage of a commercial or mixed-use
building should include pedestrian-oriented elements, such as
. Transparent display windows,
. Outdoor dining areas (cafes),
. Public art or other public amenities such as fountains, benches.
BURGER KING
Agenda Item 25
Page 5
III
Staff concludes that the proposal to redevelop the site from its current status as restaurant with a
nonconforming drive-through facility to a restaurant with a drive-through facility is not consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan recommendations for the area, the Laskin Road Gateway Design Guidelines, or the
Oceanfront Resort Area Plan. Staff compared the submitted site development plans and building
elevations to the criteria listed in the Laskin Road Gateway Overlay District, the design goals of the
Laskin Road Gateway Design Guidelines, and the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan
recommendations and the Oceanfront Resort Area Concept Plan, and finds the request does not meet
the stated criteria and goals of the adopted ordinances and guidelines. The request is lacking in furthering
exceptional quality development in the area and in enhancing pedestrian facilities and activities within this
corridor. Moreover, in December 2008, the City Council adopted the Resort Area Strategic Action Plan
(RASAP), which recommends that development within this corridor is to be urban in form, with the
building mass located adjacent to the sidewalk and roadway and parking located within the block, behind
the buildings. The applicant's proposal is not consistent with the plan.
The applicant proposes to redevelop the existing building and site, which is of a suburban design, into a
restaurant with a drive-through facility following the same suburban model. While the restaurant is an
acceptable use for this area and would complement the area, the submitted design is oriented to
automobiles, lacking in pedestrian friendly concepts. As envisioned in both approved planning policy for
this corridor and detailed planning currently under development, the vision for the Laskin Road Gateway
is of pedestrian oriented uses, consisting of buildings positioned at the right-of-way line, wide sidewalks,
cafes and seating areas. and parking behind the buildings (or at the public parking facility at 30th Street).
The proposed building is located at the maximum 20-foot setback from the right-of-way, and not
positioned at the right-of-way line. The applicant proposes a five (5) foot sidewalk easement on the site
and is not the wide sidewalk called for in the design guidelines or vision for the area. The proposed
redevelopment of the site does not depict any outdoor spaces for the users of the site. The proposed
parking will be located on the eastern side of the site, parallel to the building. The pedestrian entrance to
the building is not clearly defined and does not face the right-of-way. The proposed landscaping is not in
keeping with the landscaping recently installed on 30th Street and proposed for the 315t Street gateway
treatment. The existing free-standing sign overhangs the public right-of-way and exceeds the permitted
height for free-standing signs in the City.
Staff cannot support this request and recommends denial of the application.
CONDITIONS
These conditions were recommended by the Planning Commission February 11, 2009:
1. The site shall be developed substantially in accordance with the submitted site plan entitled "BURGER
KING, 524 LASKIN ROAD, VIRGINIA BEAC, VIRGINIA", prepared by Hoggard-Eure Associates, P.C.,
and dated 10-XX-2008 except:
a. The Laskin Road streetscape shall be re-designed to reflect the street design of the recently completed
CIP # 2-076 30th Street Laskin Road Gateway. This includes paving design, plantings, street lighting, and
site furnishings.
b. The western side of the proposed building may ultimately become the predominately viewed side when
32nd Street is connected to Laskin Road west of the property. The planting design for the western side of
the property shalf be enhanced to appropriately reduce the mass and scale to the western side of the
building to the public. The applicant shall work with the Current Planning Division of the Planning
Department to design an appropriate landscape plan for the western side of the site.
BURGER KING
Agenda Item 25
Page 6
c. The excess proposed parking over the minimum parking requirement shall be eliminated along the
Laskin Road frontage. The groups of four (4) parking spaces along the eastern side and interior portion of
the site and the eastern side of the building shall be eliminated and replaced with landscaping and site
furnishings such as seating areas and benches.
Said plan has been exhibited to the City of Virginia Beach City Council and is on file in the Planning
Department. Modifications to the plan may be approved by the Planning Director to accommodate the
items listed above.
2. The architecture of the building shall be re-designed reflecting the architectural elements of 31 Ocean
(the Hilton Hotel at 31st Street and Oceanfront) and the Old Beach Village (lofts and condominiums at
30th Street and Baltic Avenue).
3. The existing free-standing sign shall be removed. The applicant may install a monument sign, no more
than eight (8) feet in height, and similar in design to the Farm Fresh supermarket sign south of the site.
BURGER KING
Agenda Item 25
Page 7
II
III
AERIAL OF SITE LOCATION
BURGER KING
Agenda Item 25
Pag~ 8
I'
%
"'"'ll';\<',
:~~,
-\,,If:>'F ~
,~.",~
~i~
~m~
""*:;"'<"0
~
""
.,...-
mt ,~.. 'V-
PROPOSED SITE PLAN
BURGER KING
Agenda Item 25
Rage 9
II
r
,;>', ~.,,_~...t:$:,~" """ ,~- ",,,w.,
~.-__:;',_4'" -oJ:>"'- ~",Ii ~~''*'
III
..........
"~Wk
",>
$~'
~ L
l
;..
i;' ,
I
I
PROPOSED LANDSCAPE PLAN
BURGER KING
Agenda Item.. 25
Page 10
RENDERING OF PROPOSED BUILDING
BURGER KING
Agenda Item 25
Page 11
II'
II
~::i
,:F:,." ~ ~
:~~:~, ~ ~
~.:r
, .
,~
,{I
111
""'"
"':.:"
j !.,'
;,
-
vrl ","
~ 5 ~,~
Jj.~ t>- "'Y ~
~~~~
a:t:r:.......JJ
III
l' ~
,
PROPOSED BUIDLlNG ELEVATIONS
BURGER KING
Agenda Item 25
Page 12
ij.--.--.....
~llM~~~.a~~.
_.--~,~.. ....._~. '-. '
""'~ ~
.~.,~1:,,, ~~--;.
HGt~l#.:.& ~OOt\ '"UJ,
lII:l~~ "l.l '1llro!
;;,....~~C~; ,..~~~_ ::::'!~~7
rJ,;,X>J,..ni~4,.....~'Y"'...,\".,.--...Y J'v.lJ)1
IINDIIIIDWItI .L\'"ttt:~ " ~;;::;~
\'
j "H!
S~~'~l;:
4 :;: ~ ~
......;-;~ I;;
~ '~~,I:~
,,; 'I:
...
.,
l't
; ~
'\
'-r ·
~,
- ~
!
. , .
I :
~J
I
<I:
'1'
'h.
~
, '\
%i" ,
- .... .,,- H('\
> :' '~
..:'f
i
'I
) t~
.:>I." \
NU~ :'
,,: .1
L:
-I.IL. .~. "..... ,._,
~ >> '
" _ i.'IH~'~...r
n'~'" ...;'
a~:: >.~,~~l
, ~. *
$...:- :...
l
.',
~ i t
t. ~~
, I:
J~
.~ .
: }~'
~ ~
..
\
_I , i
...: <~
~<t '$' }. .~,
',;(' ~ :,; -,' ~
.~
,~
,I
.
,
~
~'
!."
2' -II..".
~i Ii :U'l
~I ,,,. j"'" "
t ~~ ~t ''!' fX 't~
~ ::~;', ,d!
f ' , "'1'
'I " \'
t, , 1 .. 11
~~ I :.::: ,~ ;"
~ ~ .. ,I'" * l y~
~ : ,": '."..t;
'; ; :' ~}. :S~
.I
!. ~
r
I
..
~,
". ..
,
..."'!0Y-!~~__
~ 1I.mlIlIlI": ":'
--...
....._.~.
I;
I
;:
i:
..
~~
::' ?t
I , .
;i I 1"'"" , '~-'--~n
"',h ':.~: .... ~:<l
f'
r
jl
!
"
I
,I
,. I
l~ (!' ,."~":"""'''.'' I
. f ,! . ~ _ J... '
'" +> ~
U't": ........""...~~ '*:.ri
J... ;" 7..~ ' ~~
~ "0 ~;' €,'~ l
~' :.~ ~ ' ~';f ~ .
, ,:i,.""..,'~: ~
;:. i. ~ --:~ __ ,; ~
!'~;f ;1; ".,....--, ('l
.,
.1
.,
i1 1;
~ ~
I,
"
, ..
'I
I
\. !
.~
~. .;
t1
I
.J
'j
j
I
'j
i
I
j
I
[~
:J
:1
~
<,
\ E
,- '-". 'rf':
ill I
-':lj::,
, ~ 'b."
, I.~(
, . d'l
i: ,I ~ )
t, '$:1
"
l,
"
!
~i
,
.~
i i
,
, -:<
.. .,
PROPOSED BUILDING ELEVATIONS
..
"
" I
1 ~;
;1 l
~ ~ ., ,\ '
~ .- ":.
i ':
.,;'
" . '"
f-t; ,,!
\' ; I .
~, f' <l
': 1 '.
l! '~
~,,11' ; ~ t~
I ,J ~.
.~. 1
,lit:: k~"
~t-A ~
, : !:' ~.
, : 't ~~ .
'. \:i;, I
., '1;;;~.
~' f. ~
, ',1:
of'
BURGER KING
Agenda Item 25
Page 13
Iii
II
III
1. 7/11/06 Rezoning (A-12 Apartment to Conditional RT-3 Resort Approved
Tourist / LRG Laskin Road Gatewa
2. Conditional Use Permit Drive-throu h facilit Pend in
3. 1/9/96 Street Closure Approved
1/14/97 Street Closure Withdrawn
4. 5/13/97 Rezoning (A-12 Apartment to Conditional RT-3 Resort Approved
Tourist / LRG Laskin Road Gatewa
5. 5/28/02 Conditional Use Permit (Commercial Parking Lot) Approved
3/27/01 Conditional Use Permit Commercial Parkin Lot A roved
6. 5/9/06 Rezoning (A-12 & A-36 Apartment, RT-3 Resort Tourist to Approved
Conditional RT-3 Resort Tourist / LRG Laskin Road
Gatewa
7. 9/17/90 Rezoning (R-40 Residential to A-12 Apartment) Approved
7/11/88 Rezonin R-40 Residential to A-12 A artment A roved
8. 6/13/95 Rezonin A-12 A artment to RT-3 Resort Tourist Ap roved
ZONING HISTORY
BURGER KING
Agenda Item 25
Page 14
~DISiCLOSURESTATEMENT
II
APPLICANT DISCLOSURE
If the applicant is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated
organization, complete the following:
1. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees,
partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary)
/'
~ Burqer Kinq Corporation, A Florida Corporation
2, List all businesses that have a parent-subsidiary 1 or affiliated business entity2
relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary)
N/A
o Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or
other unincorporated organization.
PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE
Complete this section only if property owner is different from applicant.
If the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other
unincorporated organization, complete the following:
1. List the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members,
trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary)
N/A
2. List all businesses that have a parcnt-subsidiary1 or affiliated business entitl
r€~lationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary)
N/A
CI Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm,
business, or other unincorporated organization.
7see next page for footnotes
Does an official or employee of the City of Virginia Beach have an interest in the
subject land? Yes _ No ~
If yes, what is the name of the official or employee and the nature of their interest?
-1i1 A
COI\ditional Use Permit Application
Page 7018
Revised 4,f2612007
z
<=>
I I
~
~
:....:i
,-..
ea
F--4
~
~~
~
;::::J
~
<=>
I .
H
~
z
C~~
~ ~
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
BURGER KING
Agenda Item 25
Page 15
III
z
c ~
I I
~
~ ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES
~ List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect
....-:s to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural
~ services, real estate services, financial services, accounting services, and legal
t" I services: (Attach list if nec~ss.ry) · _ ~. :::'';D
~ ~~~~~~~~.c
f--t \..0D:\~1 n ~(t,~~-\- ud.uJ oj ~SC-'C.A 0=\-6 \~
:::;:;:; , "P.rent-subsid;ary rel,'onship" me.ns"a relationship that exists when one
= corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting
r.....' power of another corporation." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act. Va.
....... Code ~ 2.2-3101,
~.
~
~
~
o
I I
f--t
~
o
c ~
II
III
II
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT II
2 "Affiliated business entity relationship' means "a relationship. other than parent-
subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a controlling ownership
interest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in one entity is also a controlling
owner in the other entity. or (iii) there is shared management or control between the business
entities. Factors that should be considered in determining the existence of an affiliated
business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person
own or manage the two entities; there are common or commingled funds or assets; the
business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities,
resources or personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship
between the entities.' See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act. Va. Code ~
2.2-3101.
CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate.
I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for
public hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at
least 30 days plior to the scheduled pUblic healing according to the instructions in this package. The
undersigned also consents to entry upon the subject property by employees of the Department of
Planning to photograph and view the site for purposes of processing and evaluating this application.
}. A.. ~ .5 If" A-,..) Co. "").~ r)W
Appfican(lil'Signature Print Name
//
1/
S-~A~ c. ""'..... ~ ~...)
Plint Name
.~
Property Owner's Signature if different than applicant)
Condrtional Use Perrnl! Application
Page 8 ot8
Revised 4/2612007
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
BURGER KING
Agenda Ite~ 25
Page 16
1\ INVESTOR RELATIONS
Management Team
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT (continued)
John W. Chidsey
Chief Executive Officer and Executive Chairman
John W. Chidsey has served as our Chief Executive Officer and a member of our board since April 2006. Mr, Chidsey became Executive
Chairman of our board on July 1, 2008, From September 2005 until April 2006, he was our President and Chief Financial Officer and from
June 2004 until September 2005, he was our President of North America. Mr. Chidsey joined us as Executive Vice President, Chief
Administrative and Financial Officer in March 2004 and held that position until June 2004. From January 1996 to March 2003, Mr. Chidsey
served in numerctus positions at Cendant Corporation, most recently as Chief Executive Officer of the Vehicle Services Division and the
Financial Services Division.
Anne Chwat
General Counsel and Corporate Secretary
Anne Chwat has :served as our General Counsel and Corporate Secretary since September 2004. From September 2000 to September
2004, Ms. Chwat served in various positions at BMG Music (now SonyBMG Music Entertainment) including as Senior Vice President,
General Counsel and Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer.
Gladys DeClouelt
Senior Vice Pres,ident, North America Company Operations
Gladys DeClouet has served as our Senior Vice President, North America Company Operations since July 2008. Ms. DeClouet was
previously the Vicl9 president of operations for Jack in the Box. Prior to joining Jack in the Box, Ms. DeClouet worked for British Petroleum
Inc., holding a number of positions of increasing responsibility in marketing, distribution, planning, finance and business development. Earlier
in her career, she was an engineer with Conoeo Inc., working in offshore oil and gas exploration and production.
Charles M. Fallon
President, North America
Chuck Fallon has served as President, North America since June 2006. From 1998 to 2006, Mr. Fatton served in various positions at
Cendant Corporation, most recently as Executive Vice President for Cendant Corporation's Car Rental Group (Avis & Budget). Prior to
joining Cendant, Mr, Fallon was a director in the investment banking division of Salomon Smith Barney from 1992 to 1998,
Armando Jacomijno
President, Latin America
Armando Jacomino has served as our President, Latin America since November 2007. Mr. Jacomino has held several positions of increasing
responsibility within Burger King Corporation's Latin America region. Most recently he served as Vice President Operations, Training from
April 2006 to November 2007 and as Director Franchise Operations from June 2002 until 2006,
Russell B. Klein
President, Globall Marketing Strategy and Innovation
Russell B. Klein hilS served as our Chief Marketing Officer since June 2003. From August 2002 to May 2003, Mr. Klein served as Chief
Marketing Officer at 7-Eleven Inc. From January 1999 to July 2002, Mr. Klein served as a Principal at Whisper Capital.
Julio A. Ramirez
Executive Vice President, Global Operations
BURGER KING
Agenda Item 25
Page 17
Iii
II
III
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT (continued)
Julio Ramirez has served as our Executive Vice President, Global Operations since September 2007. From January 2002 to September
2007, Mr. Ramirez served as our President, Latin America. Mr. Ramirez has \IIIOrked for Burger King Corporation for more than 20 years.
During his tenure, Mr, Ramirez has held several positions within the United States and the Latin America region. From February 2000 to
December 2001, Mr. Ramirez served as Senior Vice President of U.S. Franchise Operations & Development. Prior to that, Mr, Ramirez
served as President, Latin America from 1997 until 2000.
Raj Rawal
Senior Vice President and Chief Information Officer
Raj Rawal has served as our senior vice president and chief information officer since February 2005. Before joining Burger King Corporation,
he was president ofAxya Corporation, a company that provided IT leadership to large corporations. Mr. Rawal has also held leadership
positions with Cendant Car Rental Group, Trilegiant Corporation and General Electric,
Peter Robinson
President, EMEA
Peter Robinson has served as vice president and president, EMEA since October 2006. In this capacity, Mr. Robinson oversees all of our
business in EM EA. including operations, marketing and franchisee development. Before joining us, Mr. Robinson was president of Pillsbury
USA and senior vice president of General Mills Inc. Mr. Robinson has also held leadership positions in the Frito-Lay Intemational Division of
PepsiCo, Kraft General Foods and Procter & Gamble.
Peter C. Smith
Chief Human Resources Officer
Peter C. Smith has served as our Chief Human Resources Officer since December 2003. From September 1998 to November 2003, Mr.
Smith served as Senior Vice President of Human Resources at AutoNation
Peter Tan
President, Asia Pacific
Peter Tan has served as our President, Asia Pacific since November 2005. From 2002 to 2005, Mr. Tan served as Corporate Senior Vice
President and President of Greater China for McDonald's Corporation. Prior to that, from 1999 to 2003, Mr, Tan served as President,
McDonald's China Development Company.
Amy E. Wagner
Senior Vice President, Investor Relations and Global Communications
Amy Wagner has served as our Senior Vice President, Investor Relations and Global Communications since June 2007. Previously, she
served as Senior Vice President, Investor Relations from April 2006 to June 2007. From February 1990 to April 2006, Ms. Wagner served in
various corporate finance positions at Ryder System, Inc., including as Vice President, Risk Management and Insurance Operations from
January 2003 to April 2006 and Group Director, Investor Relations from June 2001 to January 2003.
Ben K. Wells
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
Ben K. Wells has served as our Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer since April 2006. From May 2005 to April 2006, Mr. Wells served as
our Senior Vice President, Treasurer. From June 2002 to May 2005 he was a Principal and Managing Director at BK Wells & Co., a
corporate treasury advisory firm in Houston, Texas. From June 1987 to June 2002, he was at Compaq Computer Corporation, most recently
as Vice President, Corporate Treasurer. Before joining Compaq, Mr. Wells held various finance and treasury responsibilities over a 10-year
period at British Petroleum,
BURGER KING
Agenda Item 25
Page 18
Item #25
Burger King Corporation
Conditional Use Permit
524 Laskin Road
District 6
Beach
February 11, 2009
REGULAR
Donald Horsley: The next item is item 25, Burger King Corporation. It's an application of
Burger King Corporation for a Conditional Use Permit for drive-through facilities on
property located on 524 Laskin Road, District 6, Beach.
C.J. Bodnar: Good afternoon Madame Chair. I'm C.J. Bodnar with Hoggard Eure
Associates. I'm here on behalf of my client, Burger King Corporation, in regards to a request
for a Conditional Use Permit to operate a drive-through at 524 Laskin Road. Burger King
has been operating on this site with a drive-through since the 1970s. As the use predates the
ordinance, the current drive-through facility is considered grandfathered providing the site
does not use the drive-through for than two years or if a major renovation is planned for the
site. As part of their corporation maintenance plans, Burger King is, on a national level,
removing some of their current older facilities and replacing them with new stores. That is
what they desire to do here on Laskin Road, and that would be considered a major
renovation, and therefore we have to apply for a Use Permit under the ordinance
requirements. V.i e've worked closely with the staff and the Resort Advisory Committee to
address the issm:s. I know the elevation that you see here does not reflect it, but the cultured
stone, which as the Resort Advisory Committee said was not very "beachy", is going to be
replaced with brick that matches the brick that's at the drive through windows. We have
done the right-of-way. We're fine with doing the right-of-way dedication on Laskin Road
that has been requested by Traffic. We will make that dedication and provide it as a
pedestrian-access easement. We've sited the building at the maximum, according to the
ordinance, 20 foot off the proposed future right-a-way, which is being dedicated so we are
meeting the requirements of zero to 20 foot setback, which is in accordance with the
ordinance, and with the site plan and building elevations that we have provided, we believe
we have adequately addressed all their issues except with the one we just dealt with the
Dunkin Donuts on the Gateway saying to drop first. The Resort Advisory Committee did
make a recommf:ndation to approve the plan. In addition we met with the civic league in the
area. They are fine with the renovation occurring. They are happy with getting a new
facility. The only other comment that I saw in the staff report was regarding the fact that
restaurants are supposed to be more than 100 feet from an A-12 zoned piece of property,
which the property in the rear was rezoned a few years ago. It belonged to Burger King. It
was bought, subdivided off and then rezoned A-12 when those condos were built two years
ago. Those condos, if you look at your Gateway Plan. According to your Gateway Plan
they are getting torn down, those condos that were built just two years ago. Burger King is
currently operating the drive-through. Should this Conditional Use Permit be denied, Burger
King will continue to operate the existing facility in its current condition. It means you end
III
Item #25
B urger King Corporation
Page 2
up with this building staying at the site. We feel that this is a win-win situation. You all
don't have to acquire right-of-way for the Laskin Road improvements. We're going to
dedicate that as frontage that is required with the Gateway Plan. You are going to get a
brand new building that is in more in keeping with the architecture that is desired along the
Gateway. Burger King, in exchange gets a new facility to help better serve their clients. We
thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. I'm available for any questions that
you have.
Janice Anderson: Are there any questions for Mr. Bodnar? Mr. Bodnar, can you bring that
site plan up please?
C.J. Bodnar: Yes ma'am.
Janice Anderson: The existing Burger King sign can that be removed and replaced?
C.J. Bognar: The existing Burger King sign is going to be gone. We have a new monument
sign shown, and it's accordance with the Laskin Road Corridor requirements.
Janice Anderson: Okay. Our little site plan is so small, if we could also ask for
improvements for the streetscape at more like a cafe.
C.J. Bodnar: We've had that discussion with staff, and when you go to widen Laskin Road,
you're going to end up ripping those improvements out. So, we have no problem. If you
want us to widen the walk to an eight foot walk, which is what staffhas asked, we will put
that in. But just to let you all know that it is all going to get ripped out when they do the
future improvements.
Janice Anderson: Okay. I would rather see the wider walk and more planting.
C.J. Bodnar: And that is what we've tried to do. We've also got planting right here along
the front here. We've bermed it up so that it is going to provide more of a screen, because
our parking lot sits about two feet above the roadway. The top of the berm sits about 112 feet
above our parking lot, and on top of that it's going to be planted with shrubs, with the trees,
so you're going to have this 312 foot barrier between the road and the parking to help screen
the view of the parking lot from the roadway.
Janice Anderson: Is there any outdoor seating there at all?
C.J. Bodnar: Not at this time. We don't have any showing on there. I'm not sure where to
put it.
Janice Anderson: I would like to see some kind of outdoor seating. If you could take a
portion of the parking lot area, expand that area, the green space, wider sidewalk, and maybe
put outdoor seating.
Item #25
Burger King Corporation
Page 3
C.J. Bodnar: If staff would be okay with this, we would even be willing to go ahead and put
one there so it looks like what your future planning is for having the seating along the
roadway. But that would require an encroachment into the right-of-way because we are
dedicating that right-of-way to the City.
Janice Anderson: Okay. I'll check with staff on that. Go ahead Ron.
Ronald Ripley: Can you hold that up again please?
C,J. Bodnar: Yes sir.
Ronald Ripley: Faith, you said they had a surplus of parking. How many spaces?
Faith Christie: They have a surplus of 12 spaces; so, they could get rid of those and put
outdoor dining in.
Ronald Ripley: So, if you brought it back.
C,J. Bodnar: I'll bring this over to you sir.
Ronald Ripley: I'll point here. I'll get back to it. If you brought it back maybe to here, wind
that up, and then it will move that back. You've got room to create the streetscape that
Planning calls for, I think.
C.J. Bodnar: I will certainly run that by Burger King Corporation. And this is actually a
corporate store. This is not owned by a franchisee. So, when they make the decision, that's
the decision that is going to be kept. I can certainly make that call as soon as I walk out of
here to see if I c~m do that.
Ronald Ripley: How do I agree, you know to sit here and trying to redesign your site, but on
the other hand it is a plan that is a division of a streetscape. I don't think it is getting there. I
don't think.
c.J. Bodner: I've got no problem talking with Burger King about adjusting that. I can't
make that decision without talking to Burger King.
Ronald Ripley: That would provide the area that you can use for your cafe.
Janice Anderson: I'm glad that you picked that up. I didn't know they had the extra parking.
Thank you.
Ronald Ripley: Yeah. Faith looked it up for me.
Janice Anderson: Okay. Great. Are there any other questions right now? Thank you.
II'
II
III
Item #25
B urger King Corporation
Page 4
C.J. Bodnar: Thank you.
Janice Anderson: No other speakers? I'll open it up for discussion again.
Eugene Crabtree: Can we make a suggestion that Ron made? Can we make that a
condition?
Janice Anderson: Yes.
Ronald Ripley: He would have to rezone?
Eugene Crabtree: He says that he doesn't know whether he can get it sold yet or not, but we
can still make it a condition can't we?
Ronald Ripley: Sure.
Janice Anderson: Yes.
Eugene Crabtree: Okay. I think we should add that as a condition.
Janice Anderson: I think so far as comments, comments are going to be the same as on the
other one. Everybody is going to be about the same thing. It doesn't meet the plan totally.
Does anybody want to make a motion for or against?
Eugene Crabtree: I'll make a motion that we approve it with the added condition for the
additional outside seating.
Janice Anderson: Removal of some of the parking spaces.
Eugene Crabtree: Removal of some of the parking spaces, add outside seating according to
the landscaping is what I was trying to say, that it be satisfactory by the Planning Director.
Janice Anderson: Yeah. Okay. We have a motion to approve with that extra condition by
Gene Crabtree. Is there a second?
Phil Russo: Second.
Janice Anderson: A second by Phil Russo.
David Redmond: Madame Chairman? To clarify again, I have to abstain on this due to a
business conflict.
Janice Anderson: Thank you Mr. Redmond.
David Redmond: Thank you.
Item #25
Burger King Corporation
Page 5
Janice Anderson: Are we ready?
AYE 6 NAY 3 ABSl ABSENT 1
ANDERSON AYE
BERNAS NAY
CRABTREE AYE
HENLEY AYE
HORSLEY AYE
KA TSIAS ABSENT
LIV AS NAY
REDMOND ABS
RIPLEY AYE
RUSSO AYE
STRANGE NAY
Ed Weeden: By a vote of6-3-1, the application of Burger King Corporation has been
approved with a modification to the condition as stated.
Janice Anderson: Thank you very much. Is there any further business? Meeting adjourned.
II
III
Relevant Information:
· Bayside District
· The applicant proposes to rezone two existing R-10 properties to
Conditional A-12 Apartment District for the development of up to 12
townhouses with a density of 6.70 units per acre.
· Ingress/egress is proposed off of Shurney Lane only; no access is
proposed from Diamond Springs Road. The proposed town homes
will be served by a public right-of-way, yet to be named.
· AICUZ is Less than 65.
Evaluation and Recommendation:
· Planning Staff recommended approval.
· Planning Commission recommends approval (10-0).
· There was opposition.
Iii
II
III
~......:'\
,C~~~''''IA'~.y~,
rci'7~ '~'t-'
(I'- t,. . - ~,
(5t . J~
~. -- :;(
I';; ",--. lit
l:~ ~"~~:J
"'C:.. ......
~~~."r~
-.....;.;............
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: METROTEC ASSOCIATES, INC. AND ARVIND GOWDA, Chanae of Zonina
District Classification (R-10 Residential District to Conditional A-12 Apartment
District), western terminus of Shurney Lane. BAYSIDE DISTRICT.
MEETING DATE: February 24,2009
. Background:
The applicant proposes to rezone two existing parcels from R-10 Residential to
Conditional A-12 Apartment District for the development of up to 12 townhouse
units with a density of 6.70 units per acre.
. Considerations:
The applicant originally submitted to staff a layout that was deemed
unacceptable, as the proposed right-of-way was immediately adjacent to an
existing dwelling on Shurney Lane, and, as such, could have potentially created
a hardship for future improvements to that property. The applicant worked
diligently to redesign the layout, right-of-way location, etc., in an effort to be
sensitive to the existing single-family dwellings to the south. The revised layout
now places rear yards, as opposed to the proposed street, adjacent to the
neighboring property. The townhomes will be no closer than 40 feet to the
existing dwelling. The result is a much more acceptable situation for the
occupants of the home to the south.
Ingress/egress is proposed off of Shurney Lane only; no access is proposed from
Diamond Springs Road. The proposed townhomes will be served by a public
right-of-way, yet to be named. The proffered elevation depicts two (2) and three
(3) story contemporary townhouses with a mix of exterior building materials of
beige cement fiberboard siding and dark tan brick. Architectural features include
faux balconies, transom windows over entryways and varying roof lines. Each
unit will have either a double-car or a single-car garage.
The Comprehensive Plan's policies recognize the need to preserve, protect, and
enhance the overall character, economic value, and aesthetic quality of
surrounding neighborhoods terms of site layout and architectural mass. The Plan
has no specific density recommendations for this site; the general land use
recommendations for the Primary Residential Area note that density for infill sites
such as this one should be compatible with the surrounding area. When
reviewing the densities for similar projects in the vicinity, this proposal is well
Metrotec Associates, Inc. and Arvind Gowda
Page 2 of 2
below densities approved in recent years. A review of the Zoning Map reveals a
pervasiveness of A-12, A-18 and even A-36 properties in the surrounding area.
This proposal as proffered is consistent with the recommendations of the Plan
and will be a good neighbor for the single-family dwellings to the south and the
senior liiving and townhouse communities to the east. A commercial shopping
center adjoins the property to the north and Diamond Springs Road borders the
site to the west.
There was opposition to the request from an adjacent property owner.
. Recommendations:
The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 9-0 to approve
the request as proffered.
. Attachments:
Staff Review
Disclosure Statement
Planning Commission Minutes
Location Map
Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends
approval.
Submitting DeJ>>artmentlAgency: Planning Department I
City Manager: ~~ \L :~1lP\.
III
II
III
METROTEC
ASSOCIATES, INC.
& ARVIND GOWDA
Agenda Item 13
January 14,2009 Public Hearing
STAFF PLANNER:
Carolyn AK Smith
REQUEST:
Conditional Chanae of Zonina (R-10 Residential District to Conditional A-12 Apartment District)
ADDRESS / DESCRIPTION: Property located on the east side of Diamond Springs Road, west of Shurney
Lane
GPIN:
14684443100000;
14684431280000
ELECTION DISTRICT: SITE SIZE:
BAYSIDE 1.79 acres
1.23 acres after right-of-way
dedication
AICUZ:
Less than 65 dB DNL
The applicant proposes to rezone two existing R-10 properties
to Conditional A-12 Apartment District for the development of
up to 12 townhouses with a density of 6.70 units per acre.
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
Ingress/egress is proposed off of Shurney Lane only; no access is proposed from Diamond Springs
Road. The proposed townhomes will be served by a publiC right-of-way, yet to be named.
The proffered contemporary elevation depicts two (2) and three (3) story townhouses with a mix of
exterior building materials of beige cement fiberboard siding and dark tan brick. Architectural features
include faux balconies, transom windows over entryways and varying roof lines. Each unit will have either
a double car or a single car garage.
LAND USE AND ZONING INFORMATION
EXISTING LAND USE: Undeveloped vacant site
METROTEC I GOWDA
Agenda Item 13
Page 1
SURROUNDING lAND
USE AND ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
· Retail shops / B-2 Community Business District
· Single-family home, vacant parcel / R-10 Residential District
· Senior housing complex, quad dwelling units / B-2 Community
Business District, A-12 Apartment District
· Diamond Springs Road, townhomes / A-12 Apartment District
West:
NATURAL RESOURCE AND
CULTURAL IFEATURES:
The site is located in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. This site is
primarily wooded. There do not appear to be any significant
environmental or cultural features on the site.
IMPACT ON CITY SERVICES
MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN (MTP) I CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP): Diamond
Springs Road in the vicinity of this request is considered a four-lane divided, major, suburban arterial.
The MTP proposes a divided facility with a bikeway within a 150 foot wide right-of-way. No CIP projects
are slated for this roadway.
Shurney Lane is a two-lane, undivided local street. No CIP projects are slated for this area.
TRAFFIC: Street Name Present Present Capacity Generated Traffic
Volume
Diamond Springs 21,069 ADT 1 28,200 ADT (Level of Existing Land Use '- 57
Road Service "CO) - 32,800 ADT ADT
1 (Level of Service "E") Proposed Land Use 3 -
70 ADT
Average Dally Tnps
2 as defined by R-10 property
3 as defined by 12 townhouses
WATER: This site must connect to City water. There is an existing 12-inch City water main in Diamond
Springs Road.
SEWER: This site must connect to City sanitary sewer. Analysis of Pump Station #362 and the sanitary sewer
collection system is required to ensure future flows can be accommodated. There is an eight-inch gravity City
sanitary sewer main and an eight-inch City sanitary force main in Shurney Lane. There is an existing 48-inch
HRSD sanitary sewer force main in Diamond Springs Road and an 8-inch HRSD sanitary sewer force main
crossing through the property to the north.
METROTEC I GOWDA
Agenda Item 13
Page 2
II
III
SCHOOLS:
School Current Capacity Generation 1 Change 2
Enrollment
Bayside Tri Campus 1322 1433 3 2
Elementarv
Bavside Middle 1071 1129 1 1
Bavside High 1996 1885 2 1
" n
generation represents the number of students that the development WIll add to the school
2 "change" represents the difference between generated students under the existing zoning and under the proposed zoning. The
number can be positive (additional students) or negative (fewer students).
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of this
request with the submitted proffers. The proffers are provided below.
EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION
Comprehensive Plan:
The Comprehensive Plan recognizes this site as within the Primary Residential Area. The land use
planning policies and principles established for the Primary Residential Area focus strong on preserving
and protecting the overall character, economic value and aesthetic quality of the stable neighborhoods
located in this area. The type, size, and relationship of land use, both residential and non-residential, in
and around these neighborhoods should serve as a guide when considering future development.
Evaluation:
The change of zoning request from R-7.5 Residential District to Conditional A-12 for the development of
12 multi-family, townhouse dwelling units is acceptable. The applicant's original layout presented to Staff
was unacceptable, as the proposed right-of-way was immediately adjacent to an existing dwelling and, as
such, could have potentially created a hardship for future improvements to that property. The applicant
worked diligently to redesign the layout, right-of-way location, etc., in an effort to be sensitive to the
several existing single-family dwellings to the south. The revised layout now places rear yards, as
opposed to the proposed street, adjacent to the neighboring property. The town homes will be no closer
than 40 feet to the existing dwelling. The result is a much more pleasant situation for the occupants of the
home to the south.
The Comprehensive Plan's policies recognize the need to preserve, protect, and enhance the overall
character, economic value, and aesthetic quality of surrounding neighborhoods terms of site layout and
architectural mass. The Plan has no specific density recommendations for this site; the general land use
recommendations for the Primary Residential Area note that density for infill sites such as this one should
be compatible with the surrounding area. When reviewing the densities for similar projects in the vicinity,
this proposal is well below densities approved in recent years. A review of the Zoning Map reveals a
pervasiveness of A-12, A-18 and even A-36 properties in the surrounding area, while the resulting density
is 6.70 units to the acre. Staff's position is that this proposal as proffered is consistent with the
recommendations of the Plan and will be a good neighbor for the single-family dwellings to the south and
the senior living and townhouse communities to the east. A commercial shopping center adjoins the
property to the north and Diamond Springs Road borders the site to the west.
METROTEC I GOWDA
Agenda Item 13
Page 3
The proffer agreement does require that the future owners of these properties participate in a mandatory
homeowners' association that will be responsible for the maintenance of the public green spaces, fencing
and the stormwater management facility. The plan proposes a privacy fence and 15 foot wide, planted
buffer along the future right-of-way adjacent to the commercial property to the north. A variance for a
portion of this fence along the proposed right-of-way will be required as it will exceed the maximum height
requirement of four (4) feet. Staff is supportive of this variance as the fence in conjunction with the
proffered landscaping will ultimately provide a natural, green screen along the property line at the rear of
the shopping center. A six (6) foot privacy fence is also proffered to provide screening to the single-family
dwelling off of Shurney Lane. Category IV landscaping will also be required to be installed along all
property lines adjacent to residentially zoned property to the south. The proffers dictate a high level of
certainty that the project will become a quality addition to this area. Superior quality building materials
such as ceml:mt fiber board and brick are included in the proffered elevations.
Staff's conclusion is that the proposal is consistent with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan
pertaining to design, quality, and compatibility with surrounding uses; the site layout is proffered in a
manner best suited for this type of development and the resulting density of 6.70 units to the acre is
acceptable in this area. Based on these findings, approval of this application is recommended.
PROFFERS
The following are proffers submitted by the applicant as part of a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA). The
applicant, consistent with Section 107(h) of the City Zoning Ordinance, has voluntarily submitted these
proffers in an attempt to "offset identified problems to the extent that the proposed rezoning is acceptable,"
(~107(h)(1)). Should this application be approved, the proffers will be recorded at the Circuit Court and serve
as conditions restricting the use of the property as proposed with this change of zoning.
PROFFER 1 :
The property shall be developed substantially as shown on Exhibit "CO entitled "DIAMOND HILL ESTATES,
PRELIMINARY PLAN, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA" (hereinafter "Site Plan"), dated October 10,2008, as
prepared by Gallup Surveyors & Engineers, LTD. The Site Plan has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach
City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning.
PROFFER 2~:
When the property is developed as proposed in the "DIAMOND HILL ESTATES TOWNHOUSE Elevation
Plan," (hereinafter "Elevation Plan") the residential structures shall have the architectural design and utilize
building materials substantially as depicted and designated on the Elevation. Exterior materials include
Hardy Boards [cement fiber board, brand name Hardie Plank], Exposed Bricks, Architectural Shingles, and
M&W Windows. The Elevation has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the
Virginia Beach Department of Planning.
PROFFER 3:
The Property will be developed with no more than twelve (12) Townhouse units as depicted on the Site Plan.
A Community Association shall be created to maintain the curb landscaping, areas surrounding the BMP
Pond, and the privacy fences.
PROFFER 4:
When the Property is developed, it shall be landscaped substantially as depicted on the Site Plan which has
METROTEC I GOWDA
Agenda Item 13
Page 4
II
III
been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of
Planning.
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.
STAFF COMMENTS: The proffers listed above are acceptable as they dictate the maximum density, quality
exterior building materials, and layout of the units.
The City Attorney's Office has reviewed the proffer agreement dated August 19, 2008, and found it to be
legally sufficient and in acceptable legal form.
NOTE: Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances.
Plans submitted with this rezoning application may require revision during detailed site plan review to
meet all applicable City Codes and Standards.
The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police
Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design
(CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site.
METROTEC I GOWDA
Agenda Item 13
Page 5
AERIAL OF SITE LOCATION
METROTEC I GOWDA
Agenda Item 13
Page 6
II
III
"'
/
#
"e,"J f
~-...
4- ~~.
,.
.j} ...6
j'~
~
_ORRlIlIllIllY
I'RllPUlIY ar _ L GelID<
IUI. 41eo. P. 1740
U. 37. P. 48
~~,,>-.\
.\.....:~'4>?
..~'iIo~
..... .L
.\~~~...
<i't '"
!:,'!:>
"'OTES:
TOTAL LOT NfEA:. 25.704 SQ. FT. (P\,,\T)
25.717 SQ. fT. OR 0.590 M: (CALCUlAlED)
REFERENCi: ok IoIER\1lW1 SOURCE: INSTRUWENT
12OO509OllO144090
IT IS NOT WE IHlDIllON Of 1l1lS SUIi\f:Y TO SHOW AlL
PH'/'SICAl IUPftOiDoIENTS ON THIS LOT.
lHIS SUI>YEY !'ERRlRNEll WITHOllT lHF lI9IEF/T Of A TITlf
SEARCH.
THIS 0WEI..UIlG Af'I'9RS TO LIE \IfIlHlN FlOOD ZONE "X"
UNSHADEll AS SHOWN ON COINUNTY PAHEl NO.
515531 0018 Eo ~TED: 12/05/96.
KENNETH R. i:.'.RPENTER
_LAND SURVO'OR. P.C.
5457 HAHSEWOHD PARKWAY
. SUFFOLK. VIRGINIA 2"""5
. . PHONE: (757.)-405-3"53
FAX: (757}-"05-JJ6J
07-076 FIlE llRFT: S8Y (/CAD)
BOUNDARY SURVEY
{rIF
LOT E
SUllllIIIISlON Of I'ROI'ERlY
SHOWN III D.B. 8104. P. 80
IIlRGIMIA !IE:IOl. _
seM.E: 1"-30' SEPrDIl1ER 10. 2007
FOR
R . R INVESTMENT HOlDING. LLC
SITE SURVEY
METROTEC I GOWDA
Agenda Item 13
Page 7
~f"f.
.\ -ll
~l i
;;.\ ~\.."
__~ ~Wl\'~
~ L,.l!
~--
---
;:: ~ ~"... /-,
(.t!/& ---~J-- ----'"':'$
&V-1) --- .~.:::: ..::::--- .
3/YV7 -.. ~ ::..--.~_--.-
---
__ ~3", --
~ __ ~f)HS
.'.'1 ~-.....
. ~
--L ~<",! =-f
[/--7' ~ \
------I ~\ t~
J....-....r----- ~ .
~:r.
~ \~\\~
o ~.~~.'\
.' \";\
-~-
.J
>0(
u
~
...
~
6
:J:
i
o
...
i
\.
.J."
.., \'-
~~ J,i
~t
\
~ ~''l
~ 'it\\\\
a. ~'t
/\.//
/
//
~ ~\
~ ~... ~
! .; ..'1 ~;) \1>
, ~. l ~ 8-
\ \ 1 ~l \ ~ ~ ~ \ ~
1.\ i"".. 1I\~\.Ir>.~
-ia t -..; \., Ill. ~'l
~~! o~\P';! ~. 1~~
~~S'li\&~~\l.~t
~~\~:'l~~\ltt.l\~;;
i 5~ ll~" 'i~, II'
/,//
///
....--
,
,
.
,
",I)
n,<-\~{f:>
C.,"
PROPOSEO S\1E p\..A.N
/---
~ .
.'~r
_ f ,;~..-
ME1R01EC I GOWO
Agenda \tem '
pagE
II
III
';:s-.
tl
~
'<)
..::::
(y""
-+ c
~ -
"- 1()S,l.l)
-......l .:lC '" 3
---l2~-J<;;)
~Q{!i'~~
C Q;: <,-l 0;." c
~ ~ ~\2j
~ ~~~~
~ ~-
~ ~~...t:;"~
;;:rl.u~~
-+ <:2:.
~ .. II .. II
.... ~ -,A".-'
~ ,"" 1
- - I
(" f.j
-2: .::s
~~
~ ';..J
~ ,r
'> -:-
'.: ~
~
-+
"' '-
<::> :S
\f c:
..0
v
II)
...
~
'"
,-
r
...
.~
~
-4-
-
C
PROPOSED BUILDING ELEVATION
METROTEC I GOWDA
Agenda Item 13
Page 9
1 02/26/08 Change of Zoning (B-2 to Conditional Granted
A-36)
CUP senior housina)
2 01/26/99 CUP home for the aaed) Granted
3 01/26/99 CRZ R-10 to Conditional B-i> Granted
4 06/14/05 CRZ R-10 to Conditional A-18) Granted
5 01/25/05 CRZ R-7.5 to Conditional A-12) Granted
6 03/11/03 CUP church) Granted
ZONING HISTORY
METROTEC / GOWDA
Agenda Item 13
Page 10
II
z
o
t-4
~
U
t-4
~
~
~
C-'
Z
t-4
Z
o
N
III
DISCLOSURE STATEME
ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES
List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect
to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural
services, real estate services, financial services, accounting services, and legal
services: (Attach list if necessary)
TOWNE BANK - FINANCIAL SERVICES
GLOBAL REAL TV - JOHN WEST. REAL ESTATE SERVICES
KELSEY LAW, PC. - LEGAL SERVICES
FENTRESS ASSOC.- ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES
1 "Parent-subsidiary relationship" means "a relationship that exists when one
corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting
power of another corporation." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act. Va.
Code ~ 2.2-3101.
2 "Affiliated business entity relationship" means "a relationship. other than parent-
subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a controlling ownership
interest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in one entity is also a controlling
owner in the other entity, or (iii) there is shared management or control between the business
entities. Factors that should be considered in determining the existence of an affiliated
business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person
own or manage the two entities; there are common or commingled funds or assets; the
business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities,
resources or personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship
between the entities." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act. Va. Code ~
2.2-3101.
CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate.
I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been scheduled for
public hearing. I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required sign on the subject property at
least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing according to the instructions in this package. The
undersigned also consents to entry upon the subject property by employees of the Department of
Planning to photograph and view the site for purposes of processing and evaluating this application.
\--\ e-+ ='lc,k,<,_ A~-r<'. l,^-
~C>(-i(~~
Applicant's Signature
METROTEC ASSOCIATES, INC
Print Name
Property Owner's Signature (if different than applicant)
Print Name
Rezoning Application
Page 10 of 10
Revised 11111;06
METROTEC I GOWDA
Agenda Item 13
Page 11
~ DISCL.OSURE STATEMENT
I]
APPLICANT DISCLOSURE
If the applicant is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated
organizat~on, complete the following:
1. List the applicant name followed by the names of all officers, members, trustees,
partners. etc. below: (Attach list if necessary)
METROTEC ASSOCIATES, INC.
RAM GOWDA. PRESIDENT
and CO-APPLICANT ARVIND GOWDA
2. List all businesses that have a parent-subsidiari or affiliated business entity'!
relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary)
N/A
o Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm. business, or
other unincorporated organization.
PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE
Complete this section only if property owner is different from applicant.
If the property owner is a corporation. partnership. firm, business. or other
unincorporated organization. complete the following:
1. List th.~ property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members,
trusteEtS, partners. etc. below: (Attach list if necessary)
2. List all businesses that have a parent-subsidiary 1 or affiliated business entiti
relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary)
o Ch.:K:k here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership. firm,
business, or other unincorporated organization.
1 & 2 See next page for footnotes
Does an official or employee of the City of Virginia Beach have an interest in the
subject land? Yes _ No ~
If yes, what is the name of the official or employee and the nature of their interest?
Rezomng ApplIcation
Page 9 of 10
Revised 1111 1/2006
z
o
t-4
~
U
t-4
~
~
~
t-'
Z
t-4
Z
o
N
METROTEC I GOWDA
Agenda Item 13
Page 12
II
III
Item # 13
Metrotec Associates, Inc. and Arvind Gowda
Change of Zoning Classification
Western terminus of Shumey Lane
District 4
Bayside
January 14,2009
REGULAR
Jay Bernas: The next item on the agenda is item 13, Metrotec Associates, Inc. and Arvind
Gowda. An application of Metrotec Associates, Inc. and Arvind Gowda for a Change of
Zoning District Classification from R-lO Residential District to Conditional A-12 Apartment
District on property located at the western terminus of Shurney Lane, District 4, Bayside,
with five proffers. Are you the applicant?
Caroline Kelsey: Good afternoon. My name is Caroline Kelsey of Kelsey Law, P.C., and I
represent Metrotec and Mr. Gowda. I wanted to introduce Mr. Gowda to you as well.
Janice Anderson: Thank you for coming down.
Ram Gowda: Thank you.
Caroline Kelsey: I wanted to thank you for your time this afternoon regarding consideration
of our proposal. We have an aerial shot available just right before the intersection of
Wesleyan Drive and Diamonu Springs Road. If you look at the surrounding neighbors, we
believe and we have worked very closely with Ms. Smith of the staff. She has been quite
helpful. We've had a couple of revisions to our proposal. We really think this is a unique
opportunity for Virginia Beach to get this part ofthe neighborhood cleaned up. Right now, I
think some of you have been out there, if I'm not mistaken? There is a lot of trash there. It is
overgrown with weeds. There is a thoroughfare, if you look at the development around it.
We have condominiums, a good many of them across the street, and a lot of people will cross
Diamond Springs. There is a shopping center here. And, we also have new construction,
which is the senior housing living that is complete now. It is exactly quite pretty. They
architecturally did a fine job on that development, and about 90 apartments for senior living
have been built here. We have approximately somewhere around 100 condominiums across
the street over here (pointing to PowerPoint). Where is the laser?
Janice Anderson: I think the light is going out.
Caroline Kelsey: Maybe Mr. Bourdon has used it. But here we go. We got condominiums
here and we also have new condominiums that have been built, very tastefully done in this
corridor. Right here adjacent or next to our proposed development we have a home and we
got two. Is it two of the homes Mr. Gowda or three?
Ram Gowda: Three.
Item # 13
Metrotec Associates, Inc. and Arvind Gowda
Page 2
Caroline Kelsey: Three. They have already been built, which is right here all the way down
here at the end of Shurney Lane. Can go to the actual plan? Thank you so much. What we
propose is that we've got a cul-de-sac, double cul-de-sac development here. We've got a 15
foot buffer of extensive landscaping, and we went to the informal this morning and I think
there was a suggestion of a privacy fence. We do have a privacy fence, six foot going right
here from this neighbor (pointing to PowerPoint) coming all the way down. And I think
there was concern about not having the fence here. I have spoken with Mr. Gowda and he is
agreeable and extending that fence there, all the way down Diamond Springs and all the way
around where the commercial, the Food Lion is in the back. So, basically the community, the
neighbors will have quite a bit of privacy with this fence that literally will wrap around the
subdivision. It is quite an improvement. We've got 12 town homes that are going to be
tastefully done. Vve've got the front elevation, if that can come up? With Hardie plank and
brick mixed together with the garages for each one of these. If you look at that whole plan
you can see they are separately placed in little pods here (pointing to PowerPoint) here, here,
here and here. They are with a pod as well off of Diamond Springs Road. There will also be
a Homeowners' Association to maintain and keep the beauty of the neighborhood up in the
future so there isn't a maintenance problem there. We believe this subdivision is just a
unique piece of property that we can do something very nice for the City of Virginia Beach.
The housing price point is between $275,000 and $325.000. I happen to be managing broker
for Wainwright Real Estate. We have over 700 agents that I manage, and their in-house
counsel. I can tell you that price point is still moving in our community. Once you get above
$400,000, it is just very hard to move $400,000 and up. So, he has made a price point with,
and this is the existing right now. They are looking at how horrible it looks right now with
the weeds and debris and everything but he has got a price point that is affordable and is still
moving in our economy. And, as interest rates hopefully continue to stay low, they may even
go lower after Pr,esident Obama comes in, and we have the rest of the stimulus package, we
believe that it is going to be a very nice community for all. Now, I do understand that we do
have one neighbor who was concerned with our project and he is here today. I hope I don't
mispronounce your name. I will try not to. Mr. Chaghtai? Is that correct? Mr. Chaghtai
may be speaking here today. But we think this privacy fence for him is actually going to
improve his property because it will give quite a bit of privacy and it is going to be a nice
wooden fence. Mr. Gowda and I don't think it is in the proffers but we can amend it. He is
thinking of doing a wood fence, a nice tastefully done wood fence on the side of Diamond
Springs Road, and on the side here that is open to the back of those units, and then do a
plastic on the side of the Food Lion because it is just the Food Lion delivery entrance for
their trucks. So, he is planning on doing a wood fence, and we think that would actually
improve Mr. Chaghtai' s property. It is my understanding, and if I'm not mistaken, he is
concerned about possibly having a problem selling his home. I have done some research and
his home has been on and off the market. I looked it up in the system for over a year now
since November 2007, and it is in that higher end price range, and we can certainly be
sympathetic to him because that is just a tough price point right now.
(
Janice Anderson: Why don't we hear from him and then you can readdress his concerns at
that time.
II
III
Item #13
Metrotec Associates, Inc. and Arvind Gowda
Page 3
Caroline Kelsey: Okay. Thank you. Are there any questions, I would love to answer them.
Janice Anderson: Thank you.
Caroline Kelsey: Thank you ma'am.
Jay Bernas: We have one person signed up in opposition. I hope I don't get his name wrong
either. Mahboob Chaghtai.
Mahboob Chaghtai: Not good but I'll help you. Good afternoon. My name is Mahboob
Chaghtai, and good afternoon to the staff, as well. It is Mahboob Chaghtai.
Jay Bernas: Okay.
Mahboob Chaghtai: I am the first neighbor in that plat of five developments that were
approved at the time. Just to begin with, I'm going to pass out a couple of things. The first is
that I have a petition drawn that my son went out. I, unfortunately took a job in Maryland
hoping that I would move my family, and as you mentioned, my house would be on the
market for over a year, and it is not selling. Understanding the tough market, I knew that
before going in. With this development it is not really going to help. So, I'm going to pass
this out. It is a little drawing because my son took it over during the night time, and I'm
going to pass this petition.
Ed Weeden: Please speak into the microphone.
Mahboob Chaghtai: I'm going to pass this original development plan that was put together
and approved by City.
Janice Anderson: Sir, is your home the one depicted in the site plan?
Mahboob Chaghtai: My home is right here (pointing to PowerPoint).
Janice Anderson: Right there.
Mahboob Chaghtai: That was the first one that the house was supposed to be built and we
got it built. I know the Planning Director doesn't know me or hasn't seem me at all but
pretty much almost every other Emilee Jensen, Ray Odom, Charlie, and I think I've seen Mr.
Bernas in there in the Planning Department. I was going there every, probably every other
day because of the situation that I was in. Mr. Gowda was also aware of it. I was defrauded
by this builder to build me a house for $300,000 and it ended up costing me over $400,000.
And, he quit during the middle of the building process, and I had to complete it. I had no
knowledge of building. I finished it thank God but it cost me a lot of money. I'm not
opposing to Mr. Gowda building a single-family home. Because when I invested in that
property, it was supposed to be a lot, that is a curbing right here behind my house that was
originally part of this planning. It was supposed to be a single-family house. And his
Item # 13
Metrotec Associates, Inc. and Arvind Gowda
Page 4
property that he is proposing this multi-family home is also residential. And that is the one
reason I put my dream house there. I've been here over 25 years, and allowed me to put a
single-family residence there. I think it would be unfair for the City to approve the plan for a
single-family home, and then allow Mr. Gowda to put up a multi-family home there which
will definitely reduce my property value. That is my biggest concern. I can't sell it right
now at this price but when a multi-family goes around my house that would really impact it.
I have been through a lot. I would probably need a whole day to explain to you when I put
this house together. My house was in the newspaper along with four others. This builder,
Carl Lewis, Jr., who defrauded us, and we lost a lot of money, a lot oftime, my blood and my
sweat is in those walls. And, I simply ask you guys to please don't approve this rezoning.
I'll be happy ifhe could build a single-family home. I'll put the first brick there. As matter
of fact, I'll help him build the walls.
Janice Anderson: You know how to do it now don't you?
Mahboob Chaghtai: Absolutely. I have no problem whatsoever. I simply ask you that I have
put my heart and soul in that place. And, another thing that she mentioned is that right in
front of my propl~rty, they are not condos. They are single-family homes. And we wanted to
live in a single-family environment, and at some point if we wanted to sell it would sell and
give us at least somewhat close to what we paid for it, if not the market value. But by doing
that it is definitely going to hurt us. I've already lost over $80,000 in this year. And by you
approving this rezoning, I gain to lose more. Not gain, I'm going to lose more. So, I ask
your sympathy. Thank you.
Janice Anderson: We are definitely sympathetic that you had problems when you built it.
Are there any quc~stions for Mr. Chaghtai? Thank you sir.
Mahboob Chaghtai: Thank you. One more thing! My wife wanted to be here but she has
been ill for the last two days and she could not. I wish she was able to make it here.
Janice Anderson: Thank you. I'll open it up. Dave.
David Redmond: I made this point this morning. I just wanted to ask. I just have one
concern and that is that way the site plan is developed and that over time and during the
exposure, I think from a couple of different places principally from Diamond Springs Road
to the back of those units, you have a pretty detailed and attractive depiction of front
elevation but no rear elevation.
Caroline Kelsey: I have those.
David Redmond: You do?
Caroline Kelsey: Yes sir.
David Redmond: May I see it?
II
III
Item # 13
Metrotec Associates, Inc. and Arvind Gowda
Page 5
Caroline Kelsey: I have several copies.
David Redmond: I am sure that the elevation.
Caroline Kelsey: If you look at the rear elevation, we do on the portion of Diamond Springs
Road, we have a mixture of brick and Hardie plank, and that is what you're looking at right
now. What Mr. Gowda was considering for these four units, the rear right here they would
just be the Hardie plank. But again, we would have that privacy wall that would literally
wrap the community in the neighborhood. So, we would have the brick feature here and we
would have the Hardie plank here and the wall going all the way around. And that is the rear
elevation for the Diamond Springs side.
Janice Anderson: So, all of the rear. So, this gentleman's property, he is going to face the
rear. If he is going to have this back, he is going to face the rear of all of these properties?
Correct?
Ram Gowda: Yes ma'am.
Caroline Kelsey: Right here is his house.
Janice Anderson: Right.
Caroline Kelsey: So, his is actually going to face the privacy fence. We have the privacy
fence right here.
Janice Anderson: Right. But past that, but through the rear, you're stating that it is all going
to be Hardie plank?
Caroline Kelsey: This portion here. Yes.
Ram Gowda: We're going to save four or five mature trees.
Caroline Kelsey: You can ask Mr. Gowda.
Ram Gowda: I went before the civic league.
Ed Weeden: For the record, state your name.
Ram Gowda: My name is Ram Gowda and I'm the owner of the property. I went before the
civic league to explain my project. And, they really liked the layout. And they wanted me to
save three or four mature trees, which are on the side of the existing of Mr. Chaghtai and the
back of McDonald's. So, I'm going to try my best to save those trees so that will give a
good buffer to his house.
Janice Anderson: Thank you.
Item # 13
Metrotec Associates, Inc. and Arvind Gowda
Page 6
Al Henley: You may be better to answer this question. Immediately north of this property
were the existing apartments or condominiums immediately to the east is developed probably
in the middle 80s. There is a large outfall that drains the complex. Is that outfall, and I was
thinking, and this plan does not show you any easement.
Ram Gowda: I know that when the owner of this apartments, they worked with this huge
pipeline along this cutup line, and the line behind the Food Lion.
Al Henley: So, it's immediately to the north of your property line?
Ram Gowda: That is right.
Al Henley: Okay.
Ram Gowda: I might be connecting my BMP to that.
Janice Anderson: Jay?
Jay Bernas: The site plan specifically shows, I guess the tree that you're trying to preserve,
but would consider adding additional landscaping where your property abuts his?
Ram Gowda: Yes. But we already show landscaping here. You can see behind the cutoff
line?
Jay Bernas: That's fine. I'm thinking like here.
Janice Anderson: Thank you sir.
Ram Gowda: Can I go there and show by hand?
Stephen White: Mr. Bernas?
Ram Gowda: Thl;: landscaping behind the curb. I will put landscaping there too.
Janice Anderson: Mr. Gowda, would come back to the microphone please so everyone can
hear you. I'm son)'.
Ram Gowda: Thank you. Like I said, we have landscaping here and also got landscaping
here. And, most of the existing trees are in this area, so we're not going to do any
landscaping there because we have a drainage ditch, and it is going out like this. We're not
going to do any landscaping here. And, there is a huge tree, which I would say. There are
some and all the backyards full of trees. That could be a buffer. And, like Ms. Kelsey said,
here are single-family condominiums. They are not single-family units. They are
condominiums. It comes all the way to the front of the existing house. There are 70 units.
It's called Diamond Common. And, here is Wesleyan Apartments, 19 unit apartments.
II
III
Item #13
Metrotec Associates, Inc. and Arvind Gowda
Page 7
Janice Anderson: Thank you. Are there any further questions? Go ahead Dave.
David Redmond: I just want to follow up on my point earlier. Thank you for enlightening
us. I think this is near the staff as well. They did have a concern about this quite frankly.
And that is particularly with those two units that are in the upper. They are going to be very
visible from Diamond Springs Road. I guess most of those units are going to be visible from
Diamond Springs Road. And, I was concerned that the rear elevation is too flat, too
indistinct. It is not going to mark a fine presentation from the roadway. The front elevation
looks terrific. I don't know the half will do that but ifthere is a way to add some
architectural detail, little bits at the top or something, it will give it bit more distinction.
What I don't want to see in this corridor, because it has a got little momentum to it, and I'm
all for that. I'm very pleased with it. Some things that are preponderant in other parts of the
city where you see these flat long walls that face out the roadway, it takes us 50 years until it
falls down for us to deal with it again, I prefer that we get this right the first time. So, what I
would like to do is ask you to work with the Planning staff to come up with a treatment, and I
don't want to spend a ton of money, but to come up with some treatment that is a bit more
distinctive that has a little bit more articulation to it, and is not quite so flat. Because that is
what the rest of the world is going to see and that is the cul-de-sac. It is not only going to be
visible to the people who live in that very, very small community but for the folks who live
there, and lots of other people that come up and down Diamond Springs Road every day. I
know the neck of these woods very, very well. I think it's going to be, not quite where we
would want it to be. Can you help with that?
Ram Gowda: We sure can,
Caroline Kelsey: So, more of an architecture standpoint? To make sure that I understand on
an architecture, so on the rear line?
Ram Gowda: Around the windows we can have some window shutters.
David Redmond: Something like that would be helpful so that it is not just a flat shear kind
of rear wall. We don't want it to look too much like the back ofthe building. I mean
granted, there is a commercial building there. I think we certainly want to make it to the
north Food Lion. We certainly want to make something that's got a little bit of attractiveness
to this corridor. We have made great strides to it. I commend you on it. I think we need to
bone this up just a bit.
Ram Gowda: We'll provide some drawings and make nice landscaping there in the back.
David Redmond: Okay.
Jack Whitney: Staff will be more than willing to work with the applicant on some refines on
city architecture as well as any fencing and landscaping.
Janice Anderson: Okay.
Item # 13
Metrotec Associates, Inc. and Arvind Gowda
Page 8
Ram Gowda: By the way, I'm a licensed engineer in the State of Virginia.
Janice Anderson: Thank you.
Caroline Kelsey: Thank you ladies and gentlemen.
Janice Anderson: Thank you. Jay Bernas, I think he has a question.
Jay Bernas; Stephen was going to clarify something on landscaping.
Stephen White: I just wanted to make sure that if you rezone this as an Apartment District
adjacent to a Residential District, so it is going to need a Category IV buffer. Mr. Gowda
was indicating there were some drainage issues being resolved. There will need to be a
landscape buffer adjacent to that, and we will work out those issues at site plan review should
you approve this and Council approve it.
Janice Anderson: Are there any other questions of the applicant? Thank you.
Caroline Kelsey: Thank you so much.
Ram Gowda: Thank you.
Janice Anderson: I'll open it up. Go ahead Dave.
David Redmond: I think I made my point clear. We see this and obviously we saw some
sort of this infill development. It is very common in Virginia Beach. I think this is a pretty
good stab at doing it well. I do have that one concern. I have confidence that it will be
adequately addressed so I would move approval.
Janice Anderson: Are there any other comments? Do I have a second?
Kathy Katsias: Second.
Janice Anderson: I have a second by Kathy Katsias. The first motion was by Dave for
approval.
Mahboob Chaghtai: I need to say something. I understand that you are considering
approving it. How can you guys do this? The original plan if somebody could bring that
original triangle plan was supposed to be a residential plan for five houses. There is only one
of my houses there, one of the builder, and one more, a neighbor, who couldn't be here
today. That was supposed to be our neighborhood. People want to live in a neighborhood. I
can't sell a house because it is not in a neighborhood, and now you're bringing in
townhouses and apartment complexes? I'll definitely not sell my house. I understand it
provides revenue to the city. It is a beautiful building. For God sake, you're killing me.
And if Mr. Gowda's interested so much in putting up this property, buy my property and get
II
III
Item # 13
Metrotec Associates, Inc. and Arvind Gowda
Page 9
me out of here. I've already lost money and here, I can't believe, my City of Virginia Beach
there planning on approving this thing?
Janice Anderson: Yes sir. Thank you for your comments you made. Mr. Chaghtai, if it is
approved, the Commission believes that it is an appropriate rezoning and that it is allowed,
just like any other applicant. It is zoned, right now R-lO, and they're going to another
residential zoning that is higher density, which if it is passed by this Commission, they
believe is a reasonable rezoning for this property. Thank you. Sir, we've already had
discussion. I addressed your comments. Joe?
Joseph Strange: I just want to remind him that we're just a recommending body. This will
go to City Council and this is also something you can talk to them about. We're just
recommending. We're not the final approval.
Mahboob Chaghtai: I understand your recommending but it is killing me. There were three
houses that were supposed to be for the neighborhood and now the apartment comes around.
It's history. I'm going to go bankrupt. And the City is going to allow him to do that. The
City is supposed to help me.
Janice Anderson: Thank you. We're ready to vote.
AYE 9 NAY 0 ABSO
ANDERSON AYE
BERNAS AYE
CRABTREE AYE
HENLEY AYE
HORSLEY
KA TSIAS AYE
LIV AS AYE
REDMOND AYE
RUSSO AYE
STRANGE AYE
ABSENT 1
ABSENT
Ed Weeden: By a vote of 9-0, the Board has approved the application of Metrotec
Associates, Inc. and Arvind Gowda.
Janice Anderson: Are there any further matters? Mr. Secretary?
Joseph Strange: There is nothing further. Meeting is adjourned.
)--
I.l.\
LW
~3
:r:.4-
\J
: ;: I
, I
I I .
, ~ j
: ~
, ;
, :
s:::
~
~
/
~.....,- ---
-.--.- --"
1.11
1\
<\,
(:,L'
\9 L\
\ :,111
" l'!lJ'
"
-::....::-:=-:
/-~
)-' '
I D, ~ '~
. ,it ..
;;(~
':ir~
1
. I
i
I
.1
i.
:-..=.::..--:-:::~~.
---- ~'"
i~~~ \
-,.!
I'll:
"-'[i
l.r) 1;
t--I,'
-~l
~l !'
Qj
i
1
i
I
I
,
!
-'. !
i-.I: I
i
. I
. ,r t
,~:l', I
,1:.\ !
[lr
()
II
III.
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE
In Reply Refer To Our File No. DF-7081
FROM:
DATE: February 9, 2009
LeS0i11eY~ DEPT: City Attorney
B. Kay Wilso~ DEPT: City Attorney
TO:
RE: Conditional Zoning Application; Metrotec Associates, Inc.
The above-referenced conditional zoning application is scheduled to be heard by the
City Council on February 24,2009. I have reviewed the subject proffer agreement, dated
August 19, 2008 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/bm
Enclosure
cc: Ka~n Hassen
PROFFER AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT made this 19th day of August, 2008, by and between
METROTE,C ASSOCIATES, INC. and ARVIND GOWDA property owners herein
collectively referred to as "GRANTORS," and THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, a
municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia, herein referred to as
"GRANTEE."
RECITALS
A. GRANTORS are the owners of certain parcels of real property located in
the Shumey Lane of the Bayside Borough of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia,
hereinafter referred to as the "Property," comprising a total of approximately two (2)
acres, and more particularly described as follows:
See Exhibit "A"
B. The GRANTORS have initiated a conditional amendment to the zoning
Map of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, by petition addressed to the GRANTEE to
change the Zoning Classification of the Property from R-I0 Residential District to A-12
Apartment (Conditional) zoning.
C. The GRANTEE'S policy is to provide only for the orderly development of
land for various purposes through zoning and other land development legislation.
D. The GRANTORS acknowledge that the competing and sometimes
incompatible development of various types of uses conflict and that in order to permit
different 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 GRANTORS' proposed
rezoning, certain reasonable conditions governing the use of the Property for the
protection of the community that are not generally applicable to land similarly zoned are
needed to resolve the situation to which the GRANTORS' rezoning application gives
nse.
E. The GRANTORS desire to offer to the GRANTEE certain proffers as a
part of the proposed development of the Property, the following reasonable conditions
related to the physical development, operation, and use of the Property to be adopted as a
part of said amendment to the Zoning Map relative and applicable to the Property, which
has a reasonable relation to the rezoning and the need for which is generated by the
rezoning.
GPIN # 1468-44-4310-0000
GPIN # 1468-44-3128-0000
This Document Prepared by:
Kelsey Law, P.C.
4098 Foxwood Drive
Virginia Beach, VA 23462
Page 1 of6
II
III
NOW, THEREFORE, and in consideration of the approval by the City of Virginia
Beach, of the proffers, GRANTORS assign GRANTEE, and other successors in title or
interest, voluntarily and without any requirement by or exaction from GRANTEE or its
governing body and without any element of compulsion or quid pro quo for zoning,
rezoning, site plan, building permit or subdivision approval, hereby make the following
declaration of 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
GRANTORS, its successors, personal representatives, assigns, GRANTEE, and other
successors in interest or title. The GRANTORS agree that in developing the Property
they will meet and comply with the following proffers if accepted by the City of Virginia
Beach, Virginia:
1. The Property shall be developed substantially as shown on the site plan
entitled "DIAMOND HILL TOWNHOMES, PRELIMINARY PLAN,
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA," (hereinafter "Site Plan"), dated October
10, 2008 as prepared by Gallup Surveyors & Engineers, LTD. The Site Plan
has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council, and is on file with the
Virginia Beach Department of Planning.
2. When the Property is developed as proposed in the "DIAMOND HILL
TOWNHOMES Elevation Plan", (hereinafter "Elevation") the residential
structures shall have the architectural design and utilize building materials
substantially as depicted and designated on the Elevation. Exterior materials
include Hardy Boards, Exposed Bricks, Architectural Shingles, and M&W
Windows. The Elevation has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City
Council, and is on file in the Virginia Beach Department of Planning.
3. The Property will be developed with no more than twelve (12) Townhouse
units, as depicted on the Site Plan. A Community Association shall be created
to maintain the curb landscaping, areas surrounding the BMP Pond, and the
privacy fences.
4. When the Property is developed it shall be landscaped substantially as
depicted on the Site Plan, which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City
Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning.
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.
All references to the A-12 (Conditional) 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 the City Council, which by reference are hereby incorporated.
Page 2 of6
The above conditions, having been proffered by the GRANTORS and allowed
and accepted by the GRANTEE as part of the amendment to the Zoning Ordinance,
shall continue in full force and effect until a subsequent amendment changes the
zoning of the Property, and specifically repeals such conditions. Such conditions
shall continue despite a subsequent amendment to the Zoning Ordinance even if the
subsequent amendment is part of a comprehensive implementation of a new or
substantially revised Zoning Ordinance until specifically repealed. The conditions,
however, may be repealed, amended, or varied by written instrument recorded in the
Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and
executed by the record owner of the Property at the time of recordation of such
instrument, provided that such instrument is consented to by the GRANTEE in
writing. The writing is to be 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. The public hearing is to be advertised pursuant to the
provisions of Section 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. The
ordinance or resolution shall be recorded along with said instrument as conclusive
evidence of such consent, and if not so recorded, said instrument shall be void.
The GRANTORS covenant and agree that:
1. The Zoning Administrator of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia shall be
vested with all necessary authority, on behalf of the governing body of the
City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, to administer and enforce the foregoing
conditions and restrictions, including the authority (a) to order, in writing,
any non-compliance with such conditions be remedied, and (b) to bring
legal action or suit to insure compliance with such conditions, including
mandatory or prohibitory injunction, abatement, damages, or other
appropriate action, suit, or proceeding.
2. The failure to meet all conditions and restrictions shall constitute a 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, and pursuant to
these provisions, the GRANTORS shall petition the governing body for
the review thereof prior to instituting proceedings in court.
4. The Zoning Map may show by an appropriate symbol on the map the
existence of conditions attaching to the zoning of the Property. 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. The ordinances and the conditions shall
be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of
Virginia Beach, Virginia, and indexed in the names of the GRANTORS
and the GRANTEE.
Page 3 of6
II
III
WITNESS THE HAND AND SEAL OF THE UNDERSIGNED.
~~JcL-
METROTEC A OCIA TES, INC. by
Ram L. Gowda, President
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged, subscribed and executed before me this
--L1!!.\Jay of August, 2008 by Ram L. Gowda, President, Metrotec Associates, Inc.
My Commission Expires:
--// ' ,.. I/u
() n-Zi,tt41 ( f/J.y'l"l.
Notary Public (j
",,,1111I "",""
..,,\\' ~,..E e. k1.",1.
..,,,, O:\,: ..........:'C:'~ }'~
~ ~ .' ~ '. ~ ~
~ ,...... ..."1 p(!~....~~
! Cj / rS REG' ~.... ~
~ 0 i Z 301"28 n; ~ E
~ i \ COMMISSION f ~ $
$ ,,'. EXPIRES : CJ ~
-~. . ..
~ 0.... 10/31/2011...~$'~
~ .....~:.. ..,4:, ~
~ ry~ ......... 0" ~~
;""" <<;A L T'" \\\.....
"""11I11"\\'\
WITNESS THE HAND AND SEAL OF THE UNDERSIGNED.
~~
AAV A
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged, subscribed and executed before me this
22 day of AM!-A. 2008 by Arvind GOW~
~~~~r I ~n
My Commission Expires: . ~ U9~
Notary Public
My commission Expires
March 14, 2012
Document Prepared By:
Kelsey Law, P.c.
4098 Foxwood Drive, Suite 200
Virginia Beach, V A 23462
Page4of6
WITNESS THE HAND AND SEAL OF THE UNDERSIGNED.
ME~~
Ram L. Gowda, President
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged, subscribed and executed before me this
--1.1:!!.tJay of August, 2008 by Ram L. Gowda, President, Metrotec Associates, Inc.
My Commission Expires:
tb/L~~ !'- PJ~~l
Notary Public (j
\\ \ "II I II If 1IIIIl
,\" ..\t!: E "'1.
" \",lOo . k... ~....
", o~ .........:~jf ~.
, .' '. '.ft r...
~ ~.... d~ p,:,..V::A".,
~ ~'''P "'.6 . 'I.', ~
~ (j .' ~r v.... '. - ~
= :' 0 REG' y'" -:
:0: ~ 301428 (\ :~=
~ 0 \ COMMISSION } ~ ~
~ ~ '. EXPIRES .. "..::
..~. .~..
~ 0....10/31/2011....," $
~ ~" ..' ... ~
""'of. ~;;..........'o~ :l..$'
""" o;.,q L T\'\ \\\''''
""'11I IItIl\\\\\
WITNESS THE HAND AND SEAL OF THE UNDERSIGNED.
ARVIND GOWDA
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged, subscribed and executed before me this
_ day IOf August, 2008 by Arvind Gowda.
My Commission Expires:
Notary Public
Document Prepared By:
Kelsey Law, P.C.
4098 Foxwood Drive, Suite 200
Virginia Beach, V A 23462
Page 4 of6
II
III
Exhibit "A"
Legal Description
Parcel 1
ALL THAT certain piece, parcel or lot of land, lying situate and being in Bayside
Borough of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia and known as Parcel C as shown on a
plat designated "Survey of Clark Property, made for H.C. Moore" by P.L. Smith, P.S.
dated June 7, 1959, which plat is duly recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court
of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in Map Book 37, at page 49, and more
particularly described as follows:
Beginning at a pin situated on the edge of the right of way of Breathwaite Road thence
running South 78 degrees 29 minutes E. 408.9 feet to an old pin; thence running North 5
degrees 0 minutes W. 79 feet to a pin; thence running North 89 degrees 92 minutes E.
567.1 feet to a pin on the edge of the right of way of Breathwaite Road; thence along the
edge of the right of way of said Road, North 18 degrees 18 minutes E. 170.15 feet to the
point of beginning.
Parcel 2
ALL THAT CERTAIN LOT, piece or parcel ofland, situate, lying and being in the City
of Virginia Beach, Virginia and being known, numbered and designated as Lot E, as
shown on that certain plat entitled. "SUBDIVISION OF PROPERTY SHOWN IN DB
814 PG 80, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA", made by Beck Associates, P.C., Civil
Engineers and Land Surveyors, which said plat is duly recorded in the Clerk's Office of
the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia in Instrument Number
200509080144090.
Page 6 of6
II
II
- 66-
Item V-K.7.
PLANNING
ITEM # 58483
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Jones, seconded by Councilman Dyer, City Council DEFERRED TO
FEBRUARY 24, 2009, Ordinance upon application of PRINCESSBORO COMPANY, INC for a
Change of Zonin!! District Classification from AG-1 Agricultural District to Conditional 0-2 Office and
Conditional B-2 Community Business District:
ORDINANCE UPON APPLICATION OF PRINCESSBORO COMPANY,
INC., FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION.
AG-1 AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO CONDITIONAL 0-2 OFFICE
AND CONDITIONAL B-2 COMMUNITY BUSINESS DISTRICT.
Ordinance upon application of PRINCESSBORO COMPANY, INC., for
a Change ofZonin!! District Classification, AG-1 Agricultural District to
Conditional 0-2 Office and Conditional B-2 Community Business
District. On the East side of Princess Anne Road. approximately 600 feet
South of Sandbridge Road (GPINs 2414213872; 2414315138 - part of).
DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE.
Voting:
11-0 (By Consent)
Council Members Voting Aye:
Glenn R Davis, William R. "Bill" DeSteph, Harry E. Diezel, Robert M
Dyer, Barbara M Henley, Vice Mayor Louis R. Jones, Mayor William D.
Sessoms, Jr., John E. Uhrin, Ron A. Villanueva, Rosemary Wilson and
James L. Wood
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
None
January 27, 2009
PRINCESSBORO
Conditional Zoning Change from AG-1 and AG-2 to B-2
Relevant Information:
· Princess Anne District
· The applicant proposes to rezone a portion of existing agriculturally
zoned properties to 0-2 Office District and Conditional B-2
Community Business District for a mix use of office and retail.
· The site is designed with the retail uses adjacent to the existing retail
to the north and the lower intensity office uses closest to the future
residential development to the south. These two uses are bisected
by an internal loop road that connects Princess Anne Road with
Sand bridge Road.
· AICLJZ is 65 - 70.
Evaluation and Recommendation:
· Planning Staff recommended approval
· Planning Commission recommends approval (9-1-1).
II
II
&;.~m."~~b!
~ ': . .~~
\\1, I
"'~ ~t
.........1'1"":
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM: PRINCESSBORO COMPANY, INC., Chanae of Zonina District
Classification, AG-1 Agricultural District to Conditional 0-2 Office and Conditional
B-2 Community Business District. East side of Princess Anne Road,
approximately 600 feet south of Sandbridge Road. PRINCESS ANNE DISTRICT.
MEETING DATE: February 24,2009
. Background:
The applicant proposes to rezone to Conditional 0-2 Office District and B-2
Community Business District 23.122 acres of a larger 46.728-acre parcel
currently zoned AG-1 and AG-2 Agricultural Districts. The parcels are between
the existing retail center at the intersection of Princess Anne and Sand bridge
Roads to the north and the future Munden Farms single-family residential
development to the south.
The Comprehensive Plan designates this site as part of the Transition Area. The
Plan states that commercial developments within the Transition Area should be
scaled to accommodate local neighborhood needs and incorporate pedestrian
friendly design techniques. Further, franchise stores, restaurants and other
establishments should not employ their standard trademark architecture, but
should make reasonable adjustments to conform to the community's design
characteristics. Commercial buildings should be generally oriented toward the
front of the lot within a well landscaped green area while locating the parking and
loading areas to the rear of the lot (pp. 148-149).
This item was deferred by City Council on January 27 due to an issue with the
proffers.
. Considerations:
The applicant proposes a business and office park for the site. The design has
proposed retail uses located adjacent to the existing retail to the north and lower
intensity office uses closest to the future residential development to the south.
The office and retail areas are separated by an internal connector road that
connects Princess Anne Road with Sandbridge Road. This roadway will tie into
the future connection of the Munden Farms residential development as well as
connect into the existing retail area with stub roads.
The applicant's conceptual site layout does not show actual building placements
Princessboro Company, Inc.
Page 2 of 2
or parking areas of individual lots within the proposed development. The
buildings and parking areas will be situated on the site to promote pedestrian
moveml9nt from business to business instead of vehicular movement in the form
of moving from one parking space to another to get from one business to
another. Access between parking areas on separate lots through use of shared-
access easements will be required. Open space areas are to be included as part
of the dl9velopment, particularly in conjunction with an open space area on
adjacent property.
Specific site plans and architectural elevations were not provided for each
propos€td site. Instead, photographs of prototypical architectural styles and signs
have be!en provided to indicate the intended styles. These will serve as a 'pattern
book' for the development.
This proposed development is consistent with the recommendations of the
Comprehensive Plan. The development, located in close proximity to a proposed
residential development (Munden Farms to the south) and one under
construction (Sherwood Lakes to west), offers an opportunity to walk or ride a
bicycle to these services in liell of driving. In sum, the proposal is well-integrated
with sun"ounding existing and future land uses, providing a high-quality
development that will serve as a desirable land use transition between the
commercial uses to the north and the low-density residential development to the
south.
. Recommendations:
The Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 9-1 with 1
abstention to approve this request as proffered.
. Attachments:
Staff Review
Disclosure Statement
Planning Commission Minutes
Location Map
Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval. Planning Commission recommends
approval.
Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department
City Manager: r Ie ~1JiI'J..
/~
II
PRINCESSBORO
DEVLOPMENT CO.
INC.
Agenda Item 14
December 10,2008 Public Hearing
Staff Planner: Karen Prochilo
III
REQUEST:
Chanae of Zonina District Classification from
AG-1 and AG-2 Agricultural Districts to Conditional 0-2 Office District and Conditional B-2 Community
Business District
Conditional Zoning Change from AG-l and AG-l to B- 2
ADDRESS I DESCRIPTION: Property located behind the property at the southeast corner side of Princess
Anne Road and Sand bridge Road.
GPIN:
24142138720000 portion of
24143151380000 portion of
COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT:
PRINCESS ANNE
SITE SIZE:
Total site: 46.728 acres
Portion to be rezoned: 23,122 acres
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
The applicant proposes to rezone a portion of existing
agriculturally zoned properties to 0-2 Office District and Conditional B-2 Community Business District for
a mix use of office and retail. The parcels are between the retail center at the intersection of Princess
Anne and Sandbridge Roads to the north and the future Munden Farms single-family residential
development to the south.
The site was designed with the retail uses adjacent to the existing retail to the north and the lower
intensity office uses closest to the future residential development to the south. These two uses are
bisected by an internal loop road that connects Princess Anne Road with Sand bridge Road. This roadway
will also tie into a future connection of the Munden Farms residential development as well as connect into
the existing retail to the north.
Specific site plans and architectural elevations were not provided for each proposed site, but photographs
of prototypical architectural styles and signs were provided to give the intent of the project.
PRINCESSBORO DEVELOPMENT CO. lNC.
-Agenda Itel1114
Pa~e 1
''':-
LAND USE AND ZONING INFORMATION
EXISTING L~~ND USE: Undeveloped site in cultivation
SURROUNDING LAND
USE AND ZONING:
North:
. Retail center
· Child care education center I B-2 Community Business District
& AG-2 Agricultural District
· Proposed single-family development I R-10 Residential District
& P-1 Preservation District
· Undeveloped farm land & single-family development under
construction I AG-2 Agricultural District & R-20 Residential
District
· Across Princess Anne Road is undeveloped land I AG-2
Agricultural District
South:
East:
West:
NATURAL RESOURCE AND
CULTURAL F:EATURES:
The majority of the site is farm field. There is a small cemetery with a 10-
foot wide private ingress-egress easement from Princess Anne Road
that will remain.
AICUZ:
The site is in an AICUZ of 65 to 70dB Ldn surrounding NAS Oceana.
The proposed use is compatible within this AICUZ.
IMPACT ON CITY SERVICES
MASTER TfU~NSPORTATION PLAN (MTP) / CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP): Princess Anne
Road and Sandbridge Road are currently two-lane minor suburban arterial roadways. The intersection of
Princess Anne! Road/Sandbridge Road/Upton Drive is part of the Princess Anne Road Phase VII (CIP 2-195)
roadway improvements project and is planned to be widened to provide additional capacity through the
intersection. This project has been delayed due to funding issues and is now scheduled for construction in the
2013 -2015 time period. A buffer in accordance with the Master Transportation Plan should be provided.
TRAFFIC: Street Name Present Present Capacity Generated Traffic
Volume
Princess Anne 11,300 ADT I 13,600 ADT Level of Existing Land Use ~ -
Road (2007) Service "C" 100 ADT
15,000 ADT 1 Level of Proposed Land Use 3 -
Service "0" - Capacity 4,700 ADT
Sand bridge Road 10,100 ADT 1 13,600 ADT 1 Level of Proposed Land Use 4 -
(2007) Service "C" 7 ,824 ADT
15,000 ADT 1 Level of
Service "0" - Caoacitv
,
Average Dally Tnps
2 as defined by agricultural land (AG-1/AG-2) weekday
3 as defined by office and retail uses developer assumptions weekday
4as defined by office and retail uses city planning weekday
PRINCESSBORO DEVELOPMENT CO. INC.
Agenda It art! 14
Pa~2
II
III
Traffic Engineering has reviewed the Traffic Impact Study (TIS) dated October 2008 for the Sand bridge
Marketplace development and has the following comments:
The TIS does not include the traffic impacts of the proposed Gateway office development that is proposed on
the southeast side of the development. This office development will generate 565 weekday trips and will have
its sole access point on the proposed loop road. Thus, the TIS must be revised to include the Gateway office
development.
The TIS includes an assumption that the square footage of retail and office space would be developed at a
rate of 5,000 SF per acre. Traffic Engineering believes that this assumption is significantly lower than what
can be developed per acre for the office land use. Based on City of Virginia Beach Planning Department Trip
Generation worksheets, the 9.6 acres of proposed office parcels will generate four times the amount of office
space included in the TIS. Based on the higher rate of development for the office land use, Traffic Engineering
is estimating that the Sand bridge Marketplace will generate a total of 7,800 trips per day, compared to the
4,700 total trips per day included in the TIS. This difference is significant and must be addressed by the
Developer's Engineer,
The TIS does not include the effects of the proposed connection from the Sandbridge Marketplace
development to the proposed Munden Farms subdivision. Some traffic distribution must be through the
Sand bridge Marketplace loop road to and from Munden Farms.
Minor technical comments regarding the traffic analysis presented in the TIS also need to be addressed and
given to the Developer's Engineer.
The Conclusions of the TIS for the Sand bridge Marketplace state that the intersection of Princess Anne
Road/Sandbridge Road/Upton Drive is currently operating under capacity and the proposed development will
not significantly affect the delay at the intersection. Thus no improvements were proposed for the intersection.
Traffic Engineering concurs with that conclusion and feels that even with the additional office generated traffic
that needs to be added to the TIS, this intersection will operate at acceptable levels of service during the peak
hours. However, because of the magnitude of the trip generation difference for the office parcels, Traffic
Engineering will reserve final opinion on the impacts of the Sandbridge Marketplace development on the
intersection until after the TIS is revised.
The TIS states that left turn lanes will be required at both the Sand bridge Road and Princess Anne Road
intersections with the proposed loop road and that a right turn lane will be required only on Princess Anne
Road. Traffic Engineering believes that a right turn lane will also be required at the Sand bridge Road
intersection after the traffic volumes are increased in the revised TIS. Traffic Engineering concurs with the
recommendation to provide left and right turn lanes on the loop road at both the Princess Anne Road and
Sandbridge Road intersections.
The TIS did not disucss the cross section for the loop road other than the lane configuration at the
intersections with Princess Anne Road and Sand bridge Road. Traffic Engineering assumes that the Public
Works typical section associated with a 60 RIW section will be provided, but the typical section of the loop
road must be clearly included in the proffers for this development.
Finally, the TIS concludes that while the intersection of the Sand bridge Marketplace loop road at Princess
Anne Road will show an unacceptable level of service as an unsignalized intersection in 2013, a traffic signal
is not warranted based on the trip generation presented in the TIS. Traffic Engineering will require that the
traffic signal warrant analysis be revised to show increased trip generation from the office parcels and to
PRINCESSBORO DEVELOPMENT CO. INC.
. n.
Agenda Ite~ 14
Page 3
include the proposed Gateway office development which will contribute to the traffic at this proposed
intersection. Given that a traffic signal could be warranted, Traffic Engineering will require the Developer to
post a traffic signal bond to cover the entire cost of a traffic signal for this intersection ($175,000).
WATER: City water does not front all the proposed parcels, but it may be extended for connection purposes
provided hydraulic analysis supports the potential demand. Separately platted parcels must connect directly to
City water. There is a 10-inch City water line in Princess Anne Road. There is a 10-inch City water main in
Sandbridge Road.
SEWER: City sanitary sewer is not available to the site (development) as proposed. Plans and bonds are
required for construction extension of sanitary sewer system. Site is not within an existing pump station service
area. Provide pump station analysis for potential receiving pump station. The Munden Farms (proposed
residential to south) Master Sanitary Sewer Pump Station Plan (DSC File: K12-629) has not been approved. A
12-inch sanitary sewer force main may be available in the future with construction of Sherwood Lakes
subdivision (DSC File: K13-634). City Sanitary sewer does not front this site.
STORMWATIER: The existing BMP does not appear to be large enough to support the proposed
development. Adequate stormwater will be shown on engineered plans for DSC review.
FIRE: No Fire! Department comments at this time.
VIRGINIA DOMINION POWER: A double circuit pole line runs parallel to the property along the east side of
Princess Annl:! Road. Any relocation of that line would be at the owner's expense.
Recommend,ation:
Staff recomml:!nds approval of this
request with 81 revision to the Trafic Impact Study as requested by Traffic Engineering, The proffers are
provided below.
EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION
Comprehensive Plan:
The Comprehensive Plan states that commercial developments within the Transition Area should be
scaled to accommodate local neighborhood needs and incorporate pedestrian friendly design techniques.
Further, franchise stores, restaurants and other establishments should not employ their standard
trademark architecture, but should make reasonable adjustments to conform to the community's design
characteristics. Commercial buildings should be generally oriented toward the front of the lot within a well
landscaped green area while locating the parking and loading areas to the rear of the lot (pp. 148-149).
The Comprehensive Plan notes that direct access from Princess Anne Road to new development sites
adjacent to thl:! road is discouraged (p. 153). Access should be coordinated with or provided from the
secondary stn:!et system or by cross-parcel access ways whenever possible. Pedestrian pathways should
be located witlhin a landscaped or natural area as described in the Existing Natural Features section (p.
154).
PRINCESSBORO DEVELOPMENT CO. INC.
Agenda Item 14
Page 4
II
III
Parking arrangements in the Transition Area should not be dominant in nature. Parking areas should be
located toward the rear of the site while locating buildings toward the front. Landscaping for the parking
area should be strategically located to provide visual relief, shading of the lot, green areas, and screening
while insuring that lines-of-sight are maintained (p. 154).
Evaluation:
The applicant proposes a business and office park between the retail center at the intersection of
Princess Anne and Sand bridge Roads to the north and the future Munden Farms single-family residential
development to the south. The design has proposed retail uses adjacent to the existing retail and lower
intensity office uses closest to the residential development.
These two use areas are bisected by an internal loop road that connects Princess Anne Road with
Sand bridge Road. This proposal will tie into the future connection of the Munden Farms residential
development as well as connect into the existing retail with stub roads.
The applicant's conceptual site layout does not show actual building placements or parking areas of
individual lots within the proposed development. The buildings and parking areas will be situated on the
site to promote pedestrian movement from business to business instead of vehicular movement in the
form of moving from one parking space to another to get from one business to another. Access between
parking areas on separate lots through use of shared-access easements will be required. Open space
areas are to be included as part of the development, particularly in conjunction with an open space area
on adjacent property.
Specific site plans and architectural elevations were not provided for each proposed site, but photographs
of prototypical architectural styles and signs have been provided to indicate the intended styles.
Staff recommends approval of this request with revisions to the Traffic Impact Study per the City of
Virginia Beach Public Works Traffic Engineering request.
PROFFERS
The following are proffers submitted by the applicant as part of a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA). The
applicant, consistent with Section 107(h) of the City Zoning Ordinance, has voluntarily submitted these
proffers in an attempt to "offset identified problems to the extent that the proposed rezoning is acceptable,"
(~1 07(h)(1)). Should this application be approved, the proffers will be recorded at the Circuit Court and serve
as conditions restricting the use of the property as proposed with this change of zoning.
PROFFER 1:
When the Property is developed, it shall be developed substantially as shown on the exhibit entitled
"CONCEPT PLAN OF PRINCESSBORO DEVLOPMENT SANDBRIDGE" dated 10/08/08, prepared by
Hoggard -Eure Associates, P.C., which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file
with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning (hereinafter referred to as the "Conceptual Site Plan").
PROFFER 2:
When those portions of the Property zoned B-2 Commercial are developed they shall be in accordance with
the restrictions and requirements of the B-2 zoning district as specified in Article 9 of the Comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia at the time of development. In addition to those
standards which are mandatory, all development, except that which can only take place upon the approval
of a Conditional Use Permit by Virginia Beach City Council shall also adhere to the following provisions of
Article II, Subsection D "DESIGN, ETC. STANDARDS FOR RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS AND SHOPPING
CENTERS" of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia:
PRINCESSBORO DEVELOPMENT CO. INC.
Agenda Ite"l14
Page 5
A. Section 24S(all applicable subsections);
B. Section 246(d)(S);
C. Section 246(e)(1).
PROFFER :3:
When any of the Property is developed, the architectural features, building materials and the quality level of
the buildings constructed shall be comparable to the quality levels depicted in the renderings entitled
"BUILDING TYPES - PHOTOGRAPHS & RENDERINGS, SANDBRIDGE MARKETPLACE, October 2S,
2008" ("Commercial Rendering" and "Office Rendering"), which have been exhibited to the City Council and
are on file in the Department of Planning. Deviations from the Renderings are anticipated and may be
allowed provided that the quality levels are the same or higher than depicted in the rendering. The
renderings are demonstrative of the quality intended by the Grantor.
PROFFER ~I:
When any of the Property is developed, all freestanding signage shall be no greater than six feet (6') in
height, shall not be internally illuminated and shall be of substantially similar design and quality as those
depicted on the pictorial renderings entitled "FREESTANDING SIGN OPTIONS "A", "B" and "C"
SANDBRIDGE MARKETPLACE, October 2S, 2008" ("Freestanding Sign Rendering"), which have been
exhibited to the City Council and are on file in the Department of Planning.
PROFFER s:
When any of the Property is developed, a ten foot (10') wide Category IV Landscaping Buffer will be
provided and planted in accordance with the City's "Landscape Screening and Buffering Specifications and
Standards" adjacent to the southern property line.
PROFFER Ei:
Further conditions may be required by the Grantee during detailed Site Plan review and administration of
applicable City Codes by all cognizant City Agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code
requirements.
STAFF COMMENTS: The proffers 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 November 4,2008, and found it to be
legally sufficient and in acceptable legal form.
NOTE: Furth,er 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 jror crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design
(CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site.
PRINCESSBORO DEVELOPMENT CO. INC.
Agenda Ite~. 14
Page 6
II
III
AERIAL OF SITE LOCATION
PRINCESSBORO DEVELOPMENT CO. INC.
Agenda Ite~. 14
Page 7
%
~
~~ fd:
'\ t.II;
-~ PI
g, "" ~-
l>~ " ~ _ _-'~: '
;;tt~ ; ;;) " ~i, \ '
~ UI~ u, ~ ~ ,~~
w' ~ Irr ". '.' \i'~ _r~/\
> ! 0; ~-..,.., J.<
t - .' ~ ~.--"
'ii,' _.' fP" d ,j R' :I: ;ll .~ \" , .
\'. . .-~f", . > Gi)-, ~ II. i:1 \: CFS'-
\,'.i _,,~\~, 'G II! f'ti.
. II' r"'~.i~, ~.I' ~
~tlt;>:'>".~=1- ,>mx,,~--~ .tI
\ k ~~"\'Al II' ij ~
"rt,~'81~ I,~ .
~>>' k ~!. I I,
V!~~ ~~"
~-lIi0\'#'#'~;~~~ "
. ~~/n\!~
_\_, !t
\
\
\
\
\
Illi \
\
~
,
J
I
!
i
I
/"
. ~...
" ' ,k:,.
........, /". {" ~
, "- : 'I
"...."'~ ,.
,..Ii ',..............,.
( """-.
I
'I
> I
I
I
~,j
:..'
~D
~,..cJr'3l}~
]flQ\l:lBONVS
lN3Nd013A30 Ol:lOBSS30N~d
"
,...".1 ld3:lWOO
Bm'
~ ~.' ~ ~ ~.~. .... - .i:
~ ... " ....., : t,
wHU;: -
I<
PROPOSED SITE PLAN
if
~'~
:~
'f
,
!~i
.1\
III
I
'...... '
,'--~ .
"\
\
\
I,
> .
\
\
\
\
\
\
PRINCESSBORO DEVELOPMENT CO. INC.
Agenda Ite'l'l14
Pate 8
,
f
"t\'i\'
C'f,~~ "
Jj~, '
...,.r
~~~p.O "
C'I~~~) ,
,t..: ,:,;; ~ ,\ "
\ \
'> .::.
4" ~ ~
,.1> >t '
, -~ ,..
"
,.,
~r
~
~;f~~
,-."':"
..
I
,/
"
'-"".,
,
"
,
;""
;
,
\
\
\...,
" ,-,-""
,....-
;
" '
., '" '" \.
~;;\~ ",.1;, ""~, ·
~~e.l~ ~~},~>' 't~~r"
l''t.~~, :,' >;:;:~,~~ .\"',;!~~ \,
'-$..:..;~~', 'h..,,!<'"
PROPOSEO S'1E Pv.~ lE~v.RGEO)
PRINCEssaORO QE\lELOPMENT CO, INe
Agenda \tern
pagE
."
~ ",,~, '" "';t
," "'~,' ,,';;. ~';~\ ,-.,
_rrELc...~SJ:CIiQN.,s-a...~tUUI ~E\,.IfWQSE:JB8LL.
-- ('- 1. r
IYEJ.CAb...~H::.caJ..O,J:i A-A FOR 60'-_.BL't!
SITE PLAN DETAILS
PRINCESSBORO DEVELOPMENT CO. INC.
Agenda Ite~! 14
Page 10
II
III
Building Types/Photographs & Renderings
SANDBRIDGE MARKETPLACE
October 25, 2008
Building Types/Photographs & Renderlnp
SANDBRIDGE MARKETPLACE
October 25, 2008
r
The traditional elements of
these office buildings are more
residential in scale and design.
PROTOTYPICAL DESIGN ELEMENTS TO BE USED
PRINCESSBORO DEVELOPMENT CO. INC.
Agenda Itentl14
Page 11
Building Types/Photographs & Renderings
SANDBRIDGE MARKETPLACE
October 25, 2008
The traditional design of this
commercial building is
complemElntary with most
designs found in the area.
1'ypes/PhotOlTlPhs a Renderings
SANDBRlDGE MARKETPLACE
October 25, 2008
The simplE~ design of this
building combines both the
rural and more traditional
styles found in the area.
PROTOTYPICAL DESIGN ELEMENTS TO BE USED
PRINCESSBORO DEVELOPMENT CO. INC.
Agenda Item 14
Page 12
II
III
BuHdlng Types/Photographs & Renderinll5
SANDBRIOGf MARKETPLACE
October 25.2008
The design elements of this
building mimic rural
characteristics.
Building Types/Photographs & Renderings
SANDBRlDGE MARKETPlACE
October 25. 2008
PROTOTYPICAL DESIGN ELEMENTS rOBE USED
PRINCESSBORO DEVELOPMENT CO. INC.
Agenda Item 14
Page 13
FREESTANDING SIGN OPTIONS
SANDBRlDGE Marketplace
October 25, 2008
A
FREESTANDING SIGN OPTIONS
SANDBRIDGE Marketplace
October 25. 2008
B
PROTOTYPICAL SIGNS TO BE USED
PRINCESSBORO DEVELOPMENT CO. INC.
Agenda Item 14
Page 14
II
III
FREESTANDING SIGN OPTlONS
SANDlIRIDGE Marketplace
October 25, 2008
c
PROTOTYPICAL SIGNS TO BE USED
PRINCESSBORO DEVELOPMENT CO. INC.
Agenda Item 14
Page 15
Conditional loning Change from AC-1 and AC-2 to B-2
1 06/13/06 Conditional Rezoning from AG-1/AG-2 to R-
20 w/ PDH2 Overlay Granted
2 03/28/06 Conditional Rezoning from AG-1/AG-2 to R-
10 & P-1 Granted
3 06/14/05 Conditional Use Permit (Child care
education center) Granted
4 08/12/03 Conditional Rezoning from AG-1/AG-2 to R-
20 & P-1 Granted
5 12/11/01 Conditional Rezoning from B-2 to A-12 Granted
6 12/11/01 Conditional Use Permit (Gas station w/
convenience store) Granted
7 OS/25/99 Conditional Rezoning from AG-2 to B-2 Granted
ZONING HISTORY
PRINCESSBORO DEVELOPMENT CO.I~C.
Agenda Itern 14
Page 16
II
III
.
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
.
z
o
I I
~
U
I I
~
r:Lc
~
c;.:,
~
z
o
N
ga
~
o
I I
f--4
I I
~
Z
o
u
APPLICANT DISCLOSURE
If the applicant is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated
organization, complete the following:
1. list the applicant name followed by the names of all officers, members. trustees,
partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary)
Princessboro Development Company, Inc.: C. Michael Fisher, President; Elwood
Parker, Vice President; David E. Kellam, Treasurer; Catherine F. Kellam, Secretary
2. List all businesses that have a parent-subsidiary 1 or affiliated business entitY
relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary)
0 Check here if the applicant is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or
other unincorporated organization.
PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE
Complete this section only if property owner is different from applicant.
If the property owner is a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other
unincorporated organization, complete the following:
1. list the property owner name followed by the names of all officers, members,
trustees, partners, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary)
2. list all businesses that have a parent-subsidiary' or affiliated business entitY
relationship with the applicant: (Attach list if necessary)
o Check here if the property owner is NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business,
or other unincorporated organization.
1 & 2 See next page for footnotes
Condrtional Rezoning Application
Page 11 0112
Revised 9/112004
PRINCESSBORO DEVELOPMENT CO. INC.
Agenda IteM, 14
Page' 17
z
o
I I
~
U
I I
~
=--
ea
t.::)
z
I I
Z
o
N
ga
~
o
I I
f-t
I I
~
Z
o
u
'Wi'!>'
-
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT II
ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES
List all known contractors or businesses that have or will provide services with respect
to the requested property use, including but not limited to the providers of architectural
services, real estate services, financial services, accounting services, and legal
services: (Attach list if necessary)
Sykes, Bourdon, Ahem & Levy, P.C.
Hoggard/Eure Associates, P.C.
1 "Parent-subsidiary relationship" means "a relationship that exists when one
corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the
voting power of another corporation." See State and Local Government Conflict of
Interests Act, Va. Code ~ 2.2-3101.
2 "Affiliated business entity relationship" means "a relationship, other than
parent-subsidiary relationship, that exists when (i) one business entity has a
controlling ownership interest in the other business entity, (ii) a controlling owner in
one entity is also a controlling owner in the other entity, or (iii) there is shared
management or control between the business entities. Factors that should be
considered in determining the existence of an affiliated business entity relationship
include that the same person or substantially the same person own or manage the two
entities; there are common or commingled funds or assets; the business entities share
the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities, resources or
personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship
between the entities." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va.
Code ~ 2.2-3101.
CERTIFICATION: I certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate.
I understand that, upon receipt of notification (postcard) that the application has been
scheduled for public hearing, I am responsible for obtaining and posting the required
sign on the subject property at least 30 days prior to the scheduled public hearing
according to the instructions in this package.
Princessboro Deyelopme Company, Inc.
By: C. Michael Fisher, President
Applicant's Sign ure Print Name
Property Owner's Signature (if different than applicant)
Print Name
Conditional Rezoning Application
Page 12 of 12
Revised 9/112004
PRINCESSBORO DEVELOPMENT CO. INC.
Agenda Ite", 14
Page 18
II
III
Item #14
Princessboro Company, Inc.
Change of Zoning District Classification
East side of Princess Anne Road
District 7
Princess Anne
December 10, 2008
REGULAR
Donald Horsley: The next item is item 14, Princessboro Company, Inc. An application
ofPrincessboro Company, Inc. for a Change of Zoning District Classification from AG-l
Agricultural District to Conditional 0-2 Office District and B-2 Community Business
District on property located on the east side of Princess Anne Road, approximately 600
feet south of Sandbridge Road, District 7, Princess Anne. Mr. Bourdon? You heard our
comments this morning?
Eddie Bourdon: Thank you Mr. Horsley. I did and I will do my loving best to be brief.
The property, as you are all aware, is a portion of a larger piece of property that really has
good sand under it. Some of us have been around along time. We tried to do a borrow
pit a couple of years ago. It didn't fly too well. Anyway, the key here behind this
existing shopping center, we're trying to create an appropriate transition, innovative
transitional area, where the Sandbridge Road is the northern boundary. The Munden
Farm property which will be developing in the near future is Transition Area, residential
development with significant open space buffers between that property and ours. This
doesn't show it particularly well (pointing to PowerPoint) but it is absolutely there. The
key is that we're trying to do a mixed use transitional development. What we're
definitely not trying to do is a strip center. I heard what you stated this morning but
when you're dealing with a situation where you're doing a strip center, we would be able
to give you elevations all day long but we're actually trying to do here is create
something a little less intense, a little more attractive but when you're doing individual
developments, there is no way we can give you exactly what every one of the buildings is
going to look like. We've got the commercial adjacent to the existing commercial in the
inner loop, if you will. One of the main points here is transportation connectivity both by
vehicular and pedestrian. So, we got the loop road here going between Princess Anne
Road and Sandbridge Road, and all of us in the course of doing these a long time
recognize a lot of intersections, major intersections, which we had these opportunity to
create this loop type of road. Here it is being created by this developer to create ideal
connectivity, also to break the commercial to the less intense office followed by the open
space, and then the low density residential. We've got a 50 foot buffer all along Princess
Anne Road. There is no buffer on the existing shopping center. It is some basic
landscaping. This will be a 50 foot buffer plus the additional right-of-way provided. As
you recall, after the loop road on the Gateway Property, which is waiting for this to go to
City Council, we got a 75 foot buffer, and then as we move over up to Munden, we're up
to the full 1 00, so we're transitioning into a full buffer for the Transition Area that exists
some where making that appropriate transition. The road will add sidewalks, cross-walks
and all pedestrian connectivity. One of the things that we probably should have done and
we will actually do, and I've talked to Mr. Eure, who's firm is the engineers on this,
Item #14
Princessboro Company, Inc.
Page 2
before City Council, we'll actually give a cross section ofthe roadway, and will colorize
this so everyone can see what were talking about and how we got connectivity,
sidewalks, the cross-walks, landscaping along the road. That is basically it. We agreed
to the guidelines being mandatory. Not just guidelines, which we proffered, and we gave
you some iideas as to what the buildings will look like. Obviously, staff has got to
approve them when they come in. Again it's an individual site by site basis. We're fine
with what Traffic Engineering has stated. I've clarified with them. One of the concerns
that I had and it wasn't real clear this morning. Ifwe do generate the need, and we're
confident that we don't but Ric and his Department (Public Works) are doing what
exactly they should be doing to protect the City's interest. These office buildings that we
anticipate given the light absorption of the time it is going take, we will be very happy to
5,000 square feet of office per acre on these office sites. It is not going to be a high rise
large intense offices, it is not demand out there in this part of the city. So, we think
what's in the Traffic Impact Study is actually accurate but were happy, and it is being
revised to go forward at a higher amount. If a traffic light is warranted, we'll certainly
put in our bonds but we would only be paying the portion of the light that serves this
property. There will be another arm on the property to the west, which will probably
happen is there will be another loop road on what is city property to connect over but if
that were to happen over on this side of Princess Anne Road then the city or whoever
developed that property would be responsible for the rest of the improvements to that
light. That is what we had some concern about. So, we really don't have any concerns.
All the conditions are fine with us. We will provide a little more detail, in terms of the
street section might be helpful. These are hypothetical. There may be four. There may
be two. We don't know. It is going to depend on demand. What we do know is that the
style. It is 1the rural and colonial. We're trying to make this no back lit signs. The things
that we proffered and shown, I think clearly demonstrate that it is going to be a high
quality and less intense type of commercial then what is caddy corner over on the Red
Mill Commons. And frankly, we have done this type of proffering before. In a number
of cases, and one that came to mind is Town Square up between Independence Boulevard
and Holland Road. It is very, very similar set of proffers on the commercial section of
that development. All of that has yet to be developed the commercial section. We've
done General Booth, and this a older development at General Booth and Ferrell Parkway,
the development that Mr. Bowles was involved in, between the Recreation Center and
General Booth. There are number of little office buildings in there. That was a similar
type of proffered developed, Jim Arnold at Rosemont Road, his little office industrial
park. That same type of proffering as well as Linda Chapell, Wayne McCleskey at Dam
Neck and General Booth, similar types of proffers on his commercial that has yet to be
developed. So, it is not unusual at all. The city does have control over the appearance of
the development that we've given you architectural guidance but when you're doing
individual stand alone buildings, as opposed to a strip center, you are not in a position to
give you what they're exactly going to look like. So, this is definitely not unusual. You
can certainly inquire with staff on that but I don't think anyone, I hope no one believes
this will be anything but top quality, given what we have proffered and the control.
We're basically seeding over in terms of the architectural elevations of each of the
proposed developments when they come in on these parcels as they are divided up.
II
III
Item #14
Princessboro Company, Inc.
Page 3
There is no access to Princess Anne Road. No access to Sandbridge Road other than the
loop road, which is again an amenity for the Sandbridge marketplace, which is what we
will call this. Most importantly, it will assist very much in moving traffic through that
intersection as the years go forward.
Janice Anderson: Any questions for Mr. Bourdon? Thank you.
Eddie Bourdon: Thank you.
Janice Anderson: Do we have any other speakers? I'll open it up with discussion? Go
ahead Jay.
Jay Bernas: I understand that this is somewhat of a unique development and these out
parcels and they don't know what is going to be coming so it is kind of difficult to show
what exactly is going to be there. But, in my mind, there is too little here. I appreciate
the applicant offering to provide additional cross sections of the roadway. I'll probably
go to City Council but for me, looking at the site plan it is just enough information. Were
requiring pedestrian friendly but I don't see sidewalks. I don't see any cross sections of
the street way. I just think that we should be careful when we start to rezone agriculture
property to either office or B-2 and that we have some control about the quality of the
development that's going to occur. For me, looking at this plan it is not just enough
information for me to even make any decision on. So, that is my biggest problem. It's
not that I'm against it. I just don't have enough information to make a good valid quality
decision that this is going to be fully developed based on what I have in front of me.
Janice Anderson: Thank you Jay. Are there any other comments? Don?
Donald Horsley: Jack, I guess this question is for you? With the information provided,
staff is still comfortable that when the site plans come in and are reviewed, the quality
and all that we have seen in some projects will be there.
Jack Whitney: Yes sir. Mr. Bourdon is correct. It's more of a challenge when you have
a commercial development which has free standing structures as opposed integrated
shopping center type construction, which is a lot easier to development elevations and so
forth for. What you've seen in the slides and I believe that Mr. Bourdon would agree that
what's in the so to speak pattern book, a group of typical styles that may be included in
the development. The developer and certainly the staff would agree that it's in the
interest of the development and the community, that as the individual structures come in,
that they be consistent in terms of quality, mass in scale, landscaping, allowing some
variation to accommodate the needs and the type of tenant that is going in there. We will
certainly work closely with the developer as it builds out to ensure the level of quality
and more a rural vernacular type development, which is in keeping with the area, yet not
typical that you might see elsewhere in the city. So, we are confident that through the
pattern book and these examples we can achieve working with the developer and the site
plans as they come in to get a consistent attractive looking product.
Item #14
Princessboro Company, Inc.
Page 4
Janice Anderson: Eddie, would you like to make a comment?
Eddie Bourdon: We have spent a consumable amount of time working with your staff in
the challenge that exists, with regard to that we don't want to see something like
Kempsville Crossing. You want to do something that fits the area. We have a lot of
elevations that are in your packets that are proffered that as Mr. Whitney has said" an
architectural form book. This is not something that lacks a lot of information. It lacks
certainty but it doesn't lack information. We are certain that it is going to look exactly
like this or any of the other attractive, again, little less intense development. We certainly
don't think it's appropriate this juncture that there is anything wrong with the center that
is there on the northern section adjacent to this property but we don't want to duplicate
that back to back. We want to transition to something that's a little more worldly
compatible: as we move into the Transition Area. So, we have to have the approval and
then bring in the retailers to buy. We're not going to do your typical whatever the retailer
may be or whatever the restaurant maybe. We're not going to their typical prototype.
We're going to have to do something that fits one of the types of rural compatible
architectun~. That's what we're trying to make happen here as opposed to, and I don't
want to degrade anything, but we're not just going to do a typical strip center. And the
type of signage that we proffered is not anything like what you will see at any of the
commercial areas of the city but other than maybe Pungo. Again, we're trying to create
something that is consistent with what we're going to see in the Transition Area. So, the
last thing that I think is lacking here is information. We just don't have certainty. And,
that's the facts that we can't show is going to looking just like this or just like that.
Janice Anderson: Thank you.
Eddie Bourdon: I appreciate it.
Janice Anderson: A question for Eddie? I'm sorry.
Eugene Crabtree: I neglected to act before and Jay brought it up when he said he didn't
see anything that referred to pedestrian. Is this limiting your signs and since you got
stables there and you got a park, I am going to presume that this is going to be a
pedestrian/bike and trails friendly community.
Eddie Bourdon: On Princess Anne Road, we have the 50 foot Transition Area, a
modified Transition Area because were moving in. And so, certainly it is there to bring
the trail all the way through to the shopping center to our north. That's provided for. If
there needs to be the portion of trail on that 50 feet, we certainly do that. On the loop
road, there will be multi purpose on one side trail and there will be a sidewalk on the
other. I would agree with Mr. Bernas it would be better if we had that cross section in
here. We'll do that before it gets to City Council. But there will be a multi purpose trail
on one side. There will be a sidewalk on the other. There will be crossings where the
road crosses or loop road that goes into Munden Farm and goes north into the shopping
II
III
Item #14
Princessboro Company, Inc.
Page 5
center. So, there will be full cross walks there. Sense of place. Signage at the entrance
for Sandbridge Market Place.
Eugene Crabtree: I just want to clarify it for the record.
Eddie Bourdon: Thank you.
Janice Anderson: Thank you. Are there any other questions? How about comments?
AI.
Al Henley: Thank you Jan.
Al Henley: I know it is difficult. We're always wanting more information and of course
more information, and as the Commission we can make a decision. I will say that even
though we lack some of the information today, and I know when Mr. Bourdon and his
clients will be working pretty closely with staff. I will say that I have the highest
confidence in staff that we can achieve what we want to achieve on this. I know their
attorney Mr. Bourdon has reached the back as well in this area, so he knows what the
community needs and what the community demands. I'm excited about the colonial
architecture and we can talk about that as well as a colonial lighting. I think that would
enhance this area that is going into the Transition Area, as well as with Munden Farm,
and when that approach road ties into this, and they get pedestrian friendly with bike
ways, as well as open landscaping. I think it will be really exciting to see this develop on
that corner. If done right, and once again I have the highest confidence in staff because
Mr. Bourdon, you know as well as I do you are going to be under a microscope as well as
all of your clients, and your clients as well as all the residents go way back. So, I'm very
confidence that it will go well of where the community demands of them. So, I'm
excited that this is coming about. And, I look forward to its development.
Janice Anderson: Thank you AI. Don.
Donald Horsley: I kind of echo some of AI's comments. I guess I remember back when
Mr. Bourdon, we did talk about a borrow pit here. I don't want to rekindle that
conversation but I think everybody here is very in tune to what this area is going to be
developed as Astro Park and the other developments that are occurring. The handicapped
horse arena and all this is located at Heritage Park, I believe it is. The Equi-kids. That is
what I was trying to say. I think all the connectivity, and Gene you probably don't want
to ride a horse up to the office. I think we got an opportunity here, and sometimes when
you try to tie somebody's hands too tight, they get drawn into things that may not be the
best in the end. So, I think this gives a little bit of latitude and with the confidence that
we have the staff and with the developer, I think we're heading in the right direction.
And, when you're prepared, I'll make a motion.
Janice Anderson: Okay. I'll take that as a motion. We have a motion by Don Horsley.
Is there a second?
Item #14
Princessboro Company, Inc.
Page 6
Barry Knight: Second.
Janice Anderson: A second by Barry Knight. Is there further discussion? I have to note
my abstention to this one. The principals and the finn has an active matter with it and it
doesn't involve this project at all but it's an active matter, so I will have to abstain.
AYE 9 NAYl ABS 1 ABSENT 0
ANDERSON ABS
BERNAS NAY
CRABTREE AYE
HENLEY AYE
HORSLEY AYE
KATSIAS AYE
KNIGHT AYE
LIVAS AYE
REDMOND AYE
RUSSO AYE
STRANGE: AYE
Ed Weeden: By a vote of9-1-1, the application ofPrincessboro Company, Inc. has been
approved.
Eddie Bourdon: Thank you all very much. Have a happy holiday season.
Janice And(~rson: Thank you. Mr. Secretary, is there anything further?
Donald Horsley: No ma'am.
Janice Andt:rson: Okay. Ifthere is nothing further from anyone, this meeting is
adjourned. Happy holidays!
II
III
Item #15
McRjers, L.L.c.
Street Closure
Northwest comer of Jefferson Boulevard and Windsor
Crescent and a portion of Windsor Crescent to the north of
Jefferson Boulevard
District 4
Bayside
December 10, 2008
DEFERRED
Janice Anderson: The last item that I have noted is agenda item 15, that's the application
of McRjers, L.L.C. They have requested a deferral. Is there any opposition to that matter
being deferred?
Joseph Strange: Chairman, I make a motion to approve deferring item 15.
Janice Anderson: Thank you. We have a motion by Joe Strange and a second by Don
Horsley.
AYE 10
NAY 0
ABSO
ABSENT 0
ANDERSON AYE
BERNAS AYE
CRABTREE AYE
HENLEY AYE
HORSLEY AYE
KA TSIAS AYE
KNIGHT AYE
LIVAS AYE
REDMOND AYE
RUSSO AYE
STRANGE AYE
Ed Weeden: By a vote of 11-0, the board has deferred item 15.
Janice Anderson: Thank you.
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE
In Reply Refer To Our File No. DF-7081
FROM:
DATE: February 9,2009
Leslie ~~ DEPT: City Attorney
B. Kay Wils . . DEPT: City Attorney
TO:
RE: Conditional Zoning Application; Princessboro Development, Inc.
The above-referenced conditional zoning application is scheduled to be heard by the
City Council on February 24,2009. I have reviewed the subject proffer agreement, dated
January 20,2009 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/bm
Enclosure
cc: Kathleen fsen
II
PREPARED BY.
III
PRINCESSBORO DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC., a Virginia corporation
TO (PROFFERED COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS AND CONDITIONS)
CTIY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia
THIS AGREEMENT, made this 20th day of January, 2009, by and between
PRINCESSBORO DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC., a Virginia corporation, Grantor; and
THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of
Virginia, Grantee.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Grantor is the owner of two (2) contiguous parcels of property
located in the Princess Anne District of the City of Virginia Beach, designated as Parcel 1
containing 13.393 acres and Parcel 2 containing 9.720 acres and described in Exhibit "A"
attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, said properties being hereinafter
referred together as the "Property"; "and
WHEREAS, the Grantor has initiated a conditional amendment to the Zoning Map of
the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, by petition addressed to the Grantee, so as to change the
Zoning Classifications of the Property from AG-1 and AG-2 to Conditional B-2 Commercial
District and Conditional 0-2 Office District; and
WHEREAS, the Grantee's policy is to provide only for the orderly development of
land for various purposes through zoning and other land development legislation; and
WHEREAS, the Grantor acknowledges that the competing and sometimes
incompatible uses conflict and that in order to permit differing uses on and in the area of the
Property and at the same time to recognize the effects of change, and the need for various
types of uses, certain reasonable conditions governing the use of the Property for the
protection of the community that are not generally applicable to land similarly zoned are
needed to cope with the situation to which the Grantor's rezoning application gives rise; and
GPIN: 2414-21-3872
IIBSyn:s, ROURDON. 2414-31-5138 (Part of)
m AHrnN & L[VY. P.c.
1
PREPARED BY:
lIB SYU:S. ROURDON.
m Allum & Lffi'. P.L
WHEREAS, the Grantor has voluntarily proffered, in writing, in advance of and
prior to the public hearing before the Grantee, as a part of the proposed amendment to the
Zoning Map, in addition to the regulations provided for the B-2 and 0-2 Zoning Districts
by the existing overall Zoning Ordinance, the following reasonable conditions related to
the physical development, operation, and use of the Property to be adopted as a part of
said amendment to the Zoning Map relative and applicable to the Property, which have a
reasonable relation to the rezoning and the need for which is generated by the rezoning.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Grantor, for itself, its successors, representatives, assigns,
grantees, and other successors in title or interest, voluntarily and without any requirement
by or exa.ction from the Grantee or its governing body and without any element of
compulsion or quid pro quo for zoning, rezoning, site plan, building permit, or subdivision
approval, hereby makes the following declaration of conditions and restrictions which
shall restrict and govern the physical development, operation, and use of the Property and
hereby covenants and agrees that this declaration shall constitute covenants running with
the Property, which shall be binding upon the Property and upon all parties and persons
claiming under or through the Grantor, its successors and assigns, grantees, and other
successors in interest or title:
1. When the Property is developed, it shall be developed substantially as shown
on the exhibits entitled "CONCEPT PLAN OF PRINCESSBORO DEVELOPMENT
SANDBRIDGE" and "ENTRANCE AND STREETS CAPE EXHIBIT PROPOSED
SANDBRIDGE MARKETPLACE FOR PRINCESSBORO DEVELOPMENT", dated
01/07/09, prepared by Hoggard/Eure Associates, P.C., which have been exhibited to the
Virginia Beach City Council and are on file with the Virginia Beach Department of
Planning (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Conceptual Site Plan").
~~. When those portions of the Property zoned B-2 Commercial are developed
they shall be in accordance with the restrictions and requirements of the B-2 zoning
district as specified in Article 9 of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of
Virginia Beach, Virginia at the time of development. In addition to those standards which
are mandatory, all development, except that which can only take place upon the approval
of a Conditional Use Permit by Virginia Beach City Council, shall also adhere to the
following provisions of Article II, Subsection D "DESIGN, ETC. STANDARDS FOR
RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS AND SHOPPING CENTERS" of the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia:
2
II
PREPARED BY:
IlIB SYI(IS. DOVRDON.
m AlIrnN & U:VY. P.C
III
A.
B.
C.
Section 245 (all applicable subsections);
Section 246(d)(5);
Section 246(e)(1).
3. When any of the Property is developed, the architectural features, building
materials and the quality level of the buildings constructed shall be comparable to the
quality levels depicted in the renderings entitled "BUILDING 1YPES - PHOTOGRAPHS &
RENDERINGS, SAND BRIDGE MARKETPLACE, October 25, 2008, ("Commercial
Rendering" and "Office Rendering") which have been exhibited to the City Council and are
on file in the Department of Planning. Deviations from the Renderings are anticipated and
may be allowed provided the quality levels are the same or higher than depicted in the
rendering. The renderings are demonstrative of the quality intended by the Grantor.
4. When any of the Property is developed, all the freestanding signage shall be
no greater than six feet (6') in height, shall not be internally illuminated and shall be of
substantially similar design and quality as those depicted on the pictorial renderings
entitled "FREESTANDING SIGN OPTIONS "A", "B" and "c" SANDBRIDGE
MARKETPLACE, October 25, 2008", ("Freestanding Sign Renderings") which have been
exhibited to the City Council and are on file in the Department of Planning.
5. When the Property is developed, a ten foot (10') wide Category IV Landscape
Buffer will be provided and planted in accordance with the City's "Landscape Screening
and Buffering Specifications and Standards" adjacent to the southern property line.
6. Further conditions may be required by the Grantee during detailed Site Plan
review and administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City agencies and
departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements.
All references hereinabove to the AG-l, AG-2, B-2 and 0-2 Districts and to the
requirements and regulations applicable thereto refer to the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, in force as of
the date of approval of this Agreement by City Council, which are by this reference
incorporated herein.
The above conditions, having been proffered by the Grantor and allowed and
accepted by the Grantee as part of the amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, shall continue
in full force and effect until a subsequent amendment changes the zoning of the Property
and specifically repeals such conditions. Such conditions shall continue despite a
subsequent amendment to the Zoning Ordinance even if the subsequent amendment is
3
PREPARED BY:
~ SYl{[S. ROURDON.
.. Allum & IIVY. p.c
part of a comprehensive implementation of a new or substantially revised Zoning
Ordinance until specifically repealed. The conditions, however, may be repealed,
amended, or varied by written instrument recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit
Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and executed by the record owner of the
Property at the time of recordation of such instrument, provided that said instrument is
consented to by the Grantee in writing as evidenced by a certified copy of an ordinance or a
resolution adopted by the governing body of the Grantee, after a public hearing before the
Grantee which was advertised pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.2-2204 of the Code
of Virginia, 1950, as amended. Said ordinance or resolution shall be recorded along with
said instrument as conclusive evidence of such consent, and if not so recorded, said
instrument shall be void.
The Grantor covenants and agrees that:
(1) The Zoning Administrator of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, shall be
vested with all necessary authority, on behalf of the governing body of the City of Virginia
Beach, Virginia, to administer and enforce the foregoing conditions and restrictions,
including the authority (a) to order, in writing, that any noncompliance with such
conditions be remedied, and (b) to bring legal action or suit to insure compliance with
such conditions, including mandatory or prohibitory injunction, abatement, damages, or
other appropriate action, suit, or proceeding;
(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
II
PREPARED BY:
no SYKI;S. ROURDON.
mil AlII;RN & L!;YY. P.c.
WITNESS the following signature and seal:
Grantor:
III
Princessboro Development Company, Inc.,
a Virginia corporation
By: ~ ~....L >' fk;/.,o+
C. M'chael sher, President
STATE OF VIRGINIA
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to-wit:
(SEAL)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 26th day of January,
2009, by C. Michael Fisher, President of Princessboro Development Company, Inc., a
Virginia corporation, Grantor.
My Commission Expires:
Notary Registration No.:
A~4ikj Jj, Jp1 t(}d:h
Notary Public
August 31, 2010
192628
5
PREPARED BY:
II SYKIS. ROURDON.
AIIrnN & 1M. P.C
EXHIBIT "A"
PARCEL 1:
ALL THAT certain lot, piece or parcel of land with any improvements thereon, situate,
lying and being in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and being known, numbered and
designated as Parcel D-1, as shown on that certain plat entitled, "SUBDIVISION OF
PARCEL C-1-Y, PARCEL C-2 PROPERlY OF PRINCESSBORO DEVELOPMENT CO.,
INC.", prepared by MSA, P.C., dated August 5, 2005, which said plat is duly recorded in
the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, as Instrument
# 20051229002079030.
GPIN: 2414-21-3872
PARCEL 2:
ALL THAT certain portion or a parcel of land with any improvements thereon, situate,
lying and being in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, being a 9.720 acre portion of that
property known and designated as PARCEL D-2, on that certain plat entitled,
"SUBDIVISION OF PARCEL C-1-Y, PARCEL C-2 PROPERlY OF PRINCESSBORO
DEVELOPMENT CO., INC.", prepared by MSA, P.C., dated August 5, 2005, which said
plat is duly recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach,
Virginia, as Instrument # 20051229002079030. Said portion of PARCEL D-2 is more
particularly described as follows:
BEGINNING at the southeast corner of Parcel D-2 as depicted on the plat entitled
"SUBDrVISION OF PARCEL C-1-Y, PARCEL C-2 PROPERlY OF PRINCESSBORO
DEVELOPMENT CO., INC.", dated August 5, 2005 and recorded in the Clerk's Office of
the Circuit Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia as Instrument No.
200512~~9002079030, and from this POINT OF BEGINNING running along the shared
boundary between PARCEL D-2 and PARCEL D-1 as depicted on the afore referenced plat
North 400 29' 12" East, a distance of 741.25 feet to a point along the southern boundary of
PARCEL D as depicted on the plat entitled "SUBDIVISION OF PARCEL C-1-Y , PARCEL
C-2" as recorded in the afore referenced Clerk's Office as Instrument No.
2005122~9002075030; thence turning and running South 490 30' 48" East, a distance of
566.95 feet to a point; thence continuing in a southwesterly direction along the arc of a
curve having a radius of 857.69 feet an arc distance of 37.01 feet to a point; thence
continuing in a southwesterly direction along the arc of a curve having a radius of 172-42
feet an arc distance of 112-44 feet to a point; thence continuing in a southwesterly direction
along the arc of a curve having a radius of 425.76 feet an arc distance of 9.58 feet to a
point; thence turning and running South 070 26' 20" East, a distance of 173.52 feet to a
point; thence turning and running South 200 39' 32" West, a distance of 311.40 feet to a
point along the shared boundary between PARCEL D-2 as depicted on the afore referenced
Subdivision of "PARCEL C-1-Y' and "PARCEL C-2" and property now or formerly owned
by Munden & Associates, L.P.; thence turning and running along said shared boundary
6
II
PREPARED BY,
lIB SYJ(rs. DOURDON.
m AlltRN & IIVY. P.C
III
North 630 22' 18" West, a distance of 774.61 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Said
Zoning Parcel contains approximately 9.720 Acres.
GPIN: 2414-31-5138 (Part of)
ConditionaIRezone/PrincessboroDevelopment/Proffer5_ Clean
Rev_l/2o/09
7
III
WELDENFIELD OF VIRGINIA
Relevant Information:
· Applicant requests withdrawal of the application.
II
III
r
._._~'O;>.~
'. ,I
~, >51
....,...""
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
'""
\..
~
ITEM: Application of Weldenfield of Virginia, L.L.C. for a Chanae of Zonina
District Classification from 1-1 Light Industrial District, R-5D Residential Duplex
District and 0-2 Office District to Conditional R-7.5 Residential District with a PD-
H2 Overlay on property located at the northwest intersection of Regent University
Drive and Jake Sears Road. DISTRICT 1 - CENTERVILLE
MEETING DATE: February 24,2009
. Background:
The applicant proposes to rezone the existing 1-1 Light Industrial, R-5D
Residential, and 0-2 Office Districts to Conditional R-7.5 Residential District with
a PD-H2 Planned Unit Overlay for the purpose of developing the site with 69
single-family dwellings and 81 townhomes.
This application was deferred for 120 days by the City Council on August 12,
2008.
. Considerations:
The applicant has requested that this item be withdrawn.
. Recommendations:
Allow withdrawal of the application.
. Attachments:
Letter from Applicant
Location Map
Recommended Action: Allow withdrawal.
Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department
City Manager~~, ~~
f
mm SYI([S, ROURDON,
_ AII[RN & lM, P.C.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW
TELEPHONE; 757-499-8971
FACSIMILE: 757-456-5445
January 16, 2009
JON M. AHERN
R. EDWARD BOURDON, JR.
JAMES T CROMWELL
L, STEVEN EMMERT
JACQUELINE A. FINK
DAVID S. HOLLAND
KATEY KORSLUND
KIRK B, LEVY
O. JACKSON MOORE, JR.
JENNIFER D, ORAM-SMITH
HOWARD R. SYKES. JR,
PEMBROKE OFFICE PARK - BUIUlING ONE
281 INOEPENDENCE BOULEVARD
FIFTH FLOOR
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 234'62-2989
Via Hand Delivery
Mayor William D. Sessoms, Jr.
Members of the Virginia Beach City Council
c/o Ruth Hodges Fraser, City Clerk
City Hall Building #1, Room 260
Municipal Center
Virginia Beach, Virginia 23456
Re: Application of Weldenfield of Virginia, L.L.C. for Change of Zoning District
Classification from 1-1 Light Industrial District, R-5D Residential District, and 0-
2 Office District to PDH-2 with an underlying R-7.5 on 46.2 Acres located at the
northwest intersection of Regent University Drive, south of Midtowne Way,
Centerville District, Virginia Beach, Virginia; GPIN #1455-57-1149 and 1455-66-
6408; Deferred by City Council at its pubic hearing on Tuesday, August 12, 2008
until its February 10, 2009
Dear Mr. Sessoms and Members of City Council:
I am writing on behalf of Weldenfield of Virginia, L.L.C. to request that the
above referenced Rezoning Application which was deferred for six (6) months by the
Virginia Beach City Council at its public hearing on Tuesday, August 12, 2008 be
WITHDRA \NN. .
We want to thank you in advance for your anticipated courtesy and
consideration in permitting this rezoning application to be withdrawn from
consideration. Should any of you have any questions or concerns please do not
hesitate to contact me.
With kind regards, I am
Very truly yours,
R. Edward Bourdon, Jr.
REBjr/arhm
cc: Jack Whitney, Director, Department of Planning
Faith Christie, Department of Planning
Stephen J. White, Department of Planning
B. Kay Wilson, Associate City Attorney
Brian Rowe, Weldenfield of Virginia, L.L.C.
Lowell W. Morse, Morse & AssociateS, Inc.
ConditionaIRezone/WeldenfieldofVirginia/FenwyckForestjSessoms_Ltrl.16.09
" I
L. APPOINTMENTS
HEALTH SERVICES ADVISORY BOARD
HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION
PLANNING COUNCIL
II
III
M. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
III
N. NEW BUSINESS
O. ADJOURNMENT
Effective January 1, 2009:
Virginia Beach City Council will hold
Informal and Formal Sessions
on the Second and Fourth Tuesdays of each month.
Workshops will be scheduled
for the First and Third Tuesdays of each month
per action taken November 18, 2008.
*******************
PROPOSED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN
FY 2010 BUDGET WORKSHOPS
March 24
City Manager's Presentation of Budget
and CIP to City Council
Council Chamber - 6 p.m.
April 7
April 14
April 21
April 16
April 28
MayS
May 12
Workshop
Workshop
Workshop
Public Hearing
Public Hearing
Reconciliation Workshop
Adoption
Council Conference Room
Council Conference Room
Council Conference Room
Green Run High School- 6 p.m.
Council Chamber - 6 p.m.
Council Conference Room
Council Chamber - 6 p.m.
********
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 2/24/09s1
www.vbl!ov.com
I[
II
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTIONS
V
I
DATE: 2/3/09 L
D S L
E D H E A W
PAGE: I D S I E J S U N I
A T E D N 0 S H U L W
AGENDA V E Z Y L N 0 R E S 0
ITEM # SUBJECT MOTION VOTE I P E E E E M I V 0 0
S H L R Y S S N A N D
VA CITY COUNCIL BRIEFINGS:
HAMPTON RDS PARTNERSHIP E. Dana Dickens,
President/CEO,
UPDATE Hampton Roads
Partnership
B SPSA Michael 1.
Barrett, SPSA
II. CITY MANAGERS BRIEFING:
A. OVERVIEW/STATUS OF PEMBROKE Burrell Saunders,
AREA IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AlA, Principal,
CMS Architects
Tom Pauls,
Comprehensive
Planning
Coordinator
IlIlN N / CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED CERTIFIED 11-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
VIIVIIIE SESSION
VIIIF MINUTES
InformallFormal Sessions 01/27/2009 APPROVED 11-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
GIH/I11. Ordinances re SPORTSPLEX:
a. AUTHORIZE Lease at 2181/2257 ADOPTED, BY 10-1 Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y Y Y
Landstown Road to VIRGINIA BEACH CONSENT
FIELD HOUSE, LLC
b. ACCEPT non-binding Term Sheets re ADOPTED, BY 9-1 Y Y Y Y N Y A Y Y Y Y
management of SportsplexlUS Field CONSENT B
Hockey S
T
A
I
N
E
D
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTIONS
V
I
DATE: 2/3/09 L
D S L
E D H E A W
PAGE: 2 D S I E J S U N I
A T E D N 0 S H U L W
AGENDA V E Z Y L N 0 R E S 0
ITEM # SUBJECT MOTION VOTE I P E E E E M I V 0 0
S H L R Y S S N A N D
c. ACCEPT Ground Lease re retail center ADOPTED, BY 9-1 Y Y Y Y N Y A Y Y Y Y
CONSENT B
S
T
A
I
N
E
D
2. Resolution to APPOUolT William M. ADOPTED, BY 11-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Macali Acting City Attorney, effective CONSENT
February 16,2009.
3. Resolutions re VDOT Urban Maintenance: ADOPTED, BY 11-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
CONSENT
a. ACCEPT additiolllal streets
b. ACCEPT corrections/deletions re ADOPTED, BY 11-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Road Inventory CONSENT
4. Ordinance to ACCEPT/APPROPRIATE ADOPTED, BY 11-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
$70,000 from FEMA re Hurricane Omar CONSENT
ADD ON Resolution recognizing City Attorney Les ADDED/ 11-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Lilley for 30 yrs dedicated ADOPTED
service/congratulations on recent appt as
VB Circuit Court Judgl:
J/I CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH:
a. 2181/2257 LandstO'WI1 Road A
APPROVED AS 9-1 Y Y Y Y N Y B Y Y Y Y
DISTRICT 7 - PRINCESS ANNE PROFFERED, S
I. COZ from AG-I Conditional B-2 BY CONSENT T
re sports enhanl:ement A
I
N
E
D
2. Conditional Use Pennit re APPROVED AS 10-1 Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y Y Y
recreational facilities CONDITIONED,
BY CONSENT
K APPOINTMENTS:
Appointed 11-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
ARTS AND HUMANnIES Martha McClees
COMMISSION Unexpired thru
6/30/12
II
II
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
SUMMARY OF COUNCU ACnONS
V
I
DATE: 2/3/09 L
D S L
E D H E A W
PAGE: 3 D S I E J S U N I
A T E D N 0 S H U L W
AGENDA V E Z Y L N 0 R E S 0
ITEM # SUBJECT MOTION VOTE I P E E E E M I V 0 0
S H L R Y S S N A N D
BIKEW A YSffRAILS ADVISORY Appointed 11-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
COMMISSION Ross Vierra
Unexpired thru
6/30/09
COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD Appointed 11-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Diane Jones
Unexpired thru
12/31/10
HISTORIC PRESERVATION Appointed 11-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
COMMISSION Marianne Littel
Unexpired thru
12/31/09
HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Appointed 11-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 'Y
Ronald L. Carter
Unexpired thru
3/31/11
MINORITY BUSINESS COUNCIL Appointed 11-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Derek Redmond
Unexpired thru
5/31/10
PERSONNELL BOARD Reappointed 11-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Ruby Christian,
William 1. Dale,
George E.
McGovern,
Larry W.
Shackelford - Alt,
George N.
Tzavaras - Alt
3 Yr Terms
3/1/09-2/29/12
WETLANDS BOARD Appointed 11-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Robert "Bob"
Thornton
Unexpired thru
9/30/12
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTIONS
V
I
DATE: 2/3/09 L
D S L
E D H E A W
PAGE: 4 D S I E J S U N I
A T E D N 0 S H U L W
AGENDA V E Z Y L N 0 R E S 0
ITEM # SUBJECT MOTION VOTE I P E E E E M I V 0 0
S H L R Y S S N A N D
RESORT ADVISORY COMMISSION Appointed 11-0 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
Nancy Creech
3 Yr Term
2/1/09-12/31/12
Appointed
Bryan Cuffee
Unexpired thro
12/31/11
UMINP ADJOURNMENT 6:14PM
PUBLIC COMMENTS 6:15-7:2Ipm
"Open Dialogue"
Peninsula Institute for Community Health 5 Speakers
@ General Booth Boull:vard and Birdneck
Road
Cold Case Task Force re unsolved murders 13 Speakers -
in City Mayor will meet
with staff/report
to citizens in 60
daYS
Effective January 1, 2009:
Virginia Beach City Council will hold
Informal and Formal Sessions
on the Second and Fourth Tuesdays of each month.
Workshops will be scheduled
for the First and I!liJ:5l Tuesdays of each month
PROPOSED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN
FY 2010 BUDGET WORKSHOPS
Febrlllary 9, 10
Workshop to Develop Program Priorities
Economic Development - Conference Room - 8 a.m.-5 p.m.
Marcll1 24
City Manager's Presentation of Budget and CIP to City Council
Council Chamber - 6 p.m.
April 7
April 14
AprilZl
April 16
April :!8
May 5
May 12
Workshop
Workshop
Workshop
Public Bearing
Public Bearing
Reconciliation Workshop
Adoption
Council Conference Room
Council Conference Room
Council Conference Room
Green Run High School- 6 p.m.
Council Chamber - 6 p.m.
Council Conference Room
Council Chamber - 6 p.m.