HomeMy WebLinkAboutFEBRUARY 16, 2010 WORKSHOP MINUTES CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
"COMMUNITY FOR A LIFETIME"
1N1A =
CITY COUNCIL
� .-r
MAYOR WILLIAM D.SESSOMS,JR.,At-Large
VICE MAYOR LOUIS R.JONES,Bayside-District 4r
GLENN R.DAVIS,Rose Hall-District 3 ss. "-" 1
WILLIAM R.DeSTEPH,Al-Large "4, a �
HARRY E.DIEZEL,Kempsville-District 2 00, ,a"
ROBERT M DYER„Centerville-District I
BARBARA M.HENLEY,Princess Anne--District 7
JOHN E. UHRIN,Beach-District 6
ROSEMARY WILSON,At-Large
JAMES L. WOOD,Lynnhaven-District 5
CITY HALL BUILDING
2401 COURTHOUSE DRIVE
CITY COUNCIL APPOINTEES VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23456-8005
CITY MANAGER-JAMES K.SPORE PHONE.(757)385-4303
CITY A7TORNEY- MARK D.STILES FAX(757)385-5669
CITY ASSESSOR- JERALD BANAGAN E-MAIL:clycncl@vbgov.com
CITY AUDITOR- LYNDON S.REMIAS
CITY CLERK- RUTH HODGES ERASER,MMC
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP AGENDA
16 FEBRUARY 2010
I. CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFINGS -Conference Room - 4:00 PM
A. HRT DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY (DEIS)
Steve Herbert, Deputy City Manager
Jack Whitney, Director—Planning
B. ELECTRONIC DISPLAY SIGN (LED) REGULATIONS
Jack Whitney, Director—Planning
C. PLANNING ITEMS —MARCH 2010
Jack Whitney, Director—Planning
1
rl�hp 8 1
`V ,5)
�4eM^wy!.; :,,i,,),
" ms vi,.:'"'';:--t4
'.ea4
.:- ttY;li'
MINUTES
VIRGINIA BEACH CITY COUNCIL
Virginia Beach, Virginia
February 16, 2010
Mayor William D. Sessoms called to order the CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP in the City
Council Conference Room, re the HRT DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY
(DEIS) on Tuesday, February 16, 2010, at 4:00 P.M.
Council Members Present.
Glenn R. Davis, William R. "Bill"DeSteph, Robert M. "Bob"
Dyer, Louis R. Jones, Barbara M. Henley, William D. Sessoms, Jr.,
John E. Uhrin, Rosemary Wilson and James L. Wood
Council Members Absent:
Harry E. Diezel
February 16, 2010
2
CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFINGS
HRT DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT STUDY(DEIS)
4:01 P.M.
Mayor Sessoms announced that Steve Herbert's Mother-in-Law had passed away and Jack
Whitney, Director -Planning, will be giving the presentation on the Impact Study.
A copy of the Verbatim Transcript and the presentation are hereby attached and made a part of
this record.
February 16, 2010
2/16/2010
Virginia Beach Transit
Extension Study
Alternative Analysis and Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement
Project Update and Briefing
Virginia Beach City Council Briefing
February 16,2010 ■
Agenda
• Background
• HDR Contract with HRT
• City Team and Committees
• Public Involvement
• City Land-Use Planning Efforts
• East-West Trail Capability
• Schedule and Next Steps
• Regional Interest and Support
• Examples in Other Cities
1
2/16/2010
ac
State Mandated Study
• Virginia General Assembly passes House Bill 6028 directing HRT to study
expansion of The Tide: July 2008
• Requires HRTDC and VDRPT to initiate study of the project in order to advance
project for solicitation of proposals under FTA's New Starts process and the 1995
PPTA
• VBTES planning and environmental analysis(AA/SDEIS)initiated May 2009
A
v �• C \�
3
Project Work Underway
• Purpose and Need Statement (NEPA Requirement)
• Description of Alternatives
• BRT
• LRT
• Expanded Bus
49 Traffic Data Collection
• Grade Crossing Analysis
40 Capital Cost Estimating Methodology
+. East End alignment Alternatives
*Trail Compatibility analysis
4
2
2/16/2010
Project Work To Be Completed
• Traffic Analysis
• Operations Planning and Costing
• Prelim. Financial and Funding Strategy
• Ridership Forecasting
• Conceptual Engineering
• Land Use, Socio-Economic, and
Environmental Impact Assessment
• Contingency for Additional Work that may
be required by FTA
5
Schedule and Next Steps
Feb.-Dec. April-May June-July August-December
2010 2011 2011 2011
Complete Public Hearings
Project Completion
of Draft Completion Cityof VBA royal
Definition: Approval
AA/SDEIS for of Draft of Locally Preferred
•PreliminaryCity AA/SDEIS (LPA)*
HRT and Alternative LPA
Ridership of Virginia based on
•Conceptual
Beach FTA Review HRTPO includes LPA
and
Engineering Review in Long Range
comment Transportation Plan
•Preliminary (LRTP)
Capital Costs
6
3
2/16/2010
Future Tasks
« Final EIS
• Preliminary Engineering
�► New Starts Submittal process
* Refined Cost Estimates, Ridership, and
Financial Planning
7
Schedule and Next Steps
Winter 2011-Spring 2012 Summer-Fall Fall—Winter 2014
2014
Record of Decision
Submittal of Preliminary Engineering Complete
(PE)/New Starts Application to FTA: Initiation FEIS/PE Application to FTA to
of detailed FTA review
begin Final Design*
Draft Financial Plan Preparation of
Application to Commitment of Non-
Approval from FTA to enter PE phase of FTA for Final Federal funds required
project* Design
Negotiations begin with
Initiate PE Activities FTA for Full Funding
Final Environmental Impact Statement Grant Agreement
8
4
2/16/2010
i y Team an • • ees
Mgmt. Committee Technical Committee
• Jim Wood • Planning,
• John Uhrin Environmental,
• Jim Spore Traffic, Public Works,
• Mark Stiles Economic
• Steve Herbert Development,
• Planning, Economic Utilities
Development, SGA,
Media and • Dominion Power
Communication • Corps of Engineers
• DEQ
• HRSD
• TPO
9
sk P u
• Completed , 7
• Initial Project Kick Off-September
• Station Area Workshops-December
• Community Advisory Committee-October,}
• Stakeholder Interviews-July ,
• Still to Come
• 3 Community Advisory Committee Mtgs
• Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) Public
Meeting
• 2 SDEIS Public Hearings
• City Council Updates
• HDR Contractual •
• HRT/City Staff on routine basis
10
5
2/16/2010
1ationship With Planning Efforts
• Comprehensive Plan
"Development of alternative(transportation) modes is a key component
to the future of transportation in Virginia Beach and Hampton Roads."
Action Item—"Incorporate public transit into the development of SGA
plans especially those that are on or near the east-west railway corridor."
Ff___:1.:________?_,,,,,,C. -
• Strategic Growth Areas
• Resort Area(Dec 2008) l
• Burton Station(Jan 2009)
• Pembroke(Nov 2009)
• Newtown(Spring 2010) +IR _ .
• On Corridor-To Be Completed b Aim
• Rosemont
• Lynnhaven
• Hilltop 11
. . ationship With a n n 1 n g Efforts
Pembroke Oceanfront
Y
a t . p�. ; .� ! i .4,P / '7+:). ., 112'2,5
Al, 1 lb l "l t , $.7 p• A!Ti
Newtown
4F ,.
G- ._ '
12
6
2/16/2010
• •
/ 1 • _ ! _ •
• HDR Typical Section within
ROW (Underground Drainage) 4
• Increased Cost not covered by
New Starts
• Additional City Property/ROW
near corridor '¢
• Preliminary Trail Design Spring
2012
,41
s . �� S. I�
- AAAA
}
13
- -deal ROW Sec fort i rail
we TRACK QEsTR.GK rd,MNl xy
INNTI STN ... 77
urrvt,K E
r
_. _ BARKER
WT
CUM m� acs RUE
M DR �yT
cr owe, s13
"' I 0
EMBANOAENI
E%6TNG GROUND
BAL_A.R!
WENN UST OCT POLE POTENTIALM
LAT RAOUNO.ON DRIWIAGE STCA
S �, SCEPOWN 14
7
2/16/2010
Regional Interest and Support
"We don't have any real chance if we want to move people down that
corridor unless we look at rail."
Brad Face,president,Future of Hampton Roads,1996
"Light rail can significantly stimulate development. It's an economic
development tool as well as a transportation tool."
Consultant James L.Prost to Hampton Roads real estate
professionals,1998
6o%of Hampton Roads residents say poor transportation is"the principle
issue detracting from the area's quality of life."
Hampton Roads Partnership,2004
15
Regional Interest and Support
"It's a readiness issue for us."
Rear Admiral Mark S. Boensel,Commanding Officer,USN Region
Mid-Atlantic,Dec.16,2009
"Virginia Beach Vision remains a strong proponent for the inclusion of a
light rail system as an integral component of Hampton Roads'
transportation network and believes resources must be found to
continue the EIS uninterrupted."
Michael J.Barrett,President,Virginia Beach Vision,February 15,2010
'The money,while not insubstantial, is a small investment in a deeper
understanding of the transportation and development options the city
will face as it maps its future."
Virginian Pilot Editorial, February 15,2010.
16
8
2/16/2010
•
•
BRT LRT
• Phoenix • Boston
• Santa Clara • San Francisco
• Los Angeles • LA
• Hartford • Portland
• Miami • Philadelphia
• Honolulu • San Diego
• Chicago • Dallas
• Louisville • Denver
• Boston • St.Louis
• Charlotte • Sacramento
• Las Vegas • Salt Lake City
• Albany • Baltimore
• Cleveland • Phoenix
• Eugene • San Jose
• Pittsburgh • Minneapolis
• Houston
• Pittsburgh
• Charlotte
17
•
ide Competition
2011 New Starts Funding
• Arizona • Michigan
• AZ,Tucson,Modern Streetcar • Ml,Grand Rapids,Division Avenue BRT
• California • Minnesota
• CA,Oakland,East Bay BRT • MN,St.Paul-Minneapolis,Central Corridor LRT
• CA,Oakland,Oakland Airport Connector • New Jersey
• CA,Riverside,Perris Valley line • NJ,Northern New e
• CA,Sacramento,South Corridor Phases Jersey,Access to the Region's Core
• CA,San Bernardino,E Street Corridor sbX BRT • New York
• CA,San Francisco,Central Subway LRT • NY,New York,Long Island Rail Road Fast Side Access
• CA,San Francisco,Van Ness Avenue BRT • NY,New York,Nostrand Avenue BRT
•
• CA.San Jose.Silicon Valley Berryessa Extension NY,New York,Second Avenue Subway Phase I
• Colorado • North Carolina
• CO,Denver,East Corridor LRT • NC.Charlotte,Northeast Corridor Light Rail Project
• CO,Denver,Gold Line • Oregon
• CO,Denver,West Corridor LRT • OR,Portland,Milwaukee LRT
• CO,Fort Collins,Mason Corridor BRT • Rhode Island
• CO,Roaring Fork Valley,BRT Project • RI,Providence.South County Commuter Rail
• Connecticut • Texas
• CT,Hartford,New Britain-Hartford Busway • TX.Austin,Metro Rapid BRT
• CT,Stamford,Urban Transitway Phase II • TX.Dallas,Northwest/Southeast LRT MOS
• Delaware • TX,Houston,North Corridor LRT
• DE,Wilmington,Wilmington to Newark Commuter Rail Improvements • TX,Houston,Southeast Corridor LRT
• Florida • TX,Houston,University Corridor LRT
• FL,Miami,Orange line Phase z:North Corridor Metrorail Extension • Utah
• FL,Orlando,Central Florida Commuter Rail Transit-Initial Operating • UT,Salt Lake City,Mid-Jordan LRT
Segment • UT,Salt Lake City,Weber County to Salt Lake City Commuter Rail
• Hawaii • UT.Salt Lake City,Draper LRT
• HI,Honolulu High Capacity Transit Corridor Project • Virginia
• Massachusetts • VA,Northern Virginia,Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project-Extension to Wiehle
18
• MA,Boston,Assembly Square Station • Washington
Source Annual Repon on Funding
• MA,Boston,Silver Line Phase III • WA,Seattle,University link LRT Extension •„,sere smml
• WA,King County,West Seattle BRT sine.•aa r•r,t,r.e•us'e
9
2/16/2010 .
Examples
lilt t
7:t:':1:::•;!1: 'tit, '-' ;, . '', .4-:-k. ;ii' ' - ,,
,„ ii T A. ... ... +4. . „,,,,r...
h 4 'by #n •
1 '4
r w .._ _
Portland Street Car Denver BRT
Phoenix LRT Minnea.olis LRT
I --t. ' tt
A ¢ ♦ .4.
: , ko,:') V
1 Lai •.
illi'mi . IA
IVIiii
C r
�f
• _.,,,,„_ __ --- ___ .•,, i . ' .
19
•
" 1" Neter
T ' ..P
a
, p� r • , I H rl- -x.4.1r. =
ti --,,,,,I.,,,,„. '. 2•)..... i F i
G, s..
rs:_ pini j
Pu
Salt Lake City LRT Houston LRT
Charlotte LRT Dallas LRT
I ,,,. 1 1'
rt:
�, . _ is rt_et„..:
� La
.1,` 20
10
2/16/2010
- C harlOtte-
• 9.6 Mile Starter
Line-Nov 2007 -
• Planning for ii mile
extension started in -
2000. Target
opening 2016 -_ �-- W
• Expansions include _`i "`' ._;__=
Commuter Rail, . .r° .c,
Streetcar, LRT, and = -7"-_ -.
BRT - V. __
SIE
- 21
mom�-
• 12 Miles-Opened June , _ F...
2004 YF V i
• Expanding stations to �.
accommodate 3-car im �
trains
• 11-mile Central ''''
Corridor expansion Transit
may begin this year Park & Ride
• LRT expansion, BRT,
Express Bus, and - ,
Commuter Rail ,+
planned s
.s.Y,YY
22
11
2/16/2010
•
•
.tS'
+caa. «ry 44k t
I S.
b
+1•I'. M► m'
,,
l _
_j
# r
l+Y - s �_vio 11 n Rpt" ..
_...+M wR.�F 5'.*.. it ^�4.R ` i�.`
_., ....-int,...,,.
24
12
1
VIRGINIA BEACH CITY COUNCIL
February 16, 2010
4 : 00 p .m.
WORKSHOP SESSION
CITY MANAGER ' S BRIEFING
HRT DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY (DEIS)
VERBATIM
CITY COUNCIL
William D. Sessoms , Jr . , Mayor At-Large
Louis R. Jones, Vice-Mayor Bayside - District 4
William R. DeSteph At-Large
Harry E . Diezel Kempsville - District 2
Robert M. Dyer Centerville - District 1
Barbara M. Henley Princess Anne - District 7
Glenn R. Davis Rose Hall - District 3
John E . Uhrin Beach - District 6
(Vacant) At-Large
Rosemary Wilson At-Large
James L. Wood Lynnhaven - District 5
CITY MANAGER: James K. Spore
CITY ATTORNEY: Mark D . Stiles
CITY ASSESSOR: Jerald Banagan
CITY AUDITOR: Lyndon S . Remias
CITY CLERK: Ruth Hodges Fraser, MMC
SARAH DEAL JENKINS, CMC
DEPUTY CITY CLERK, II
2
MAYOR SESSOMS: The first thing we ' re going to do is
we ' re going to have a briefing on the
HRT Draft Environmental Impact Study. Barbara Henley was kind
enough to give me a call and suggest that we be brought up by
our City staff with some information on it , in that City money
has the potential of going in it in the next week. So, Steve
Herbert, if y ' all don ' t know, his father-in-law passed away,
and he ' s at the funeral as we speak. And Jack Whitney is
going to run with the whole ball , and, Jack, we thank you for
coming over .
Jim, do you want to elaborate?
CITY MANAGER: I know he ' s going to do a great job.
JACK WHITNEY: Mayor, Members of Council, pleasure
to be with you this afternoon. As
you know all too well, next week on your agenda will be an
Appropriations Ordinance to transfer $244 , 000 , approximately,
towards a match of a million two of appropriated Federal money
to continue and complete the Draft Environmental Study for the
Virginia Beach Transit Extension effort .
A lot of the content you ' re about to see was part of Phil
Shucet ' s presentation to you a week ago . The balance of it
really is our attempt to give you a little bit more of a local
perspective on the conduct of the study to reassure you that
we are, the City staff and stakeholders in our community, are
fully engaged in this effort . It ' s not a pure HRT effort
process, but they as our partner, together with the State and
Federal government, are working together and have for almost a
year on this particular piece of the very complicated and
longer-term overall effort which will provide us , City
Council, staff, our community, and our region, with a very
extensive suite of data upon which policy decisions can be
made regarding various transit programs and development in
Virginia Beach and in the region.
Your action next week will simply provide matching money to
help get the answers to these questions so that you can base
your decision upon that . It in no way, shape, or form
obligates the City to any particular transit alternative or
any at all . It doesn ' t mean that we ' re supporting Light Rail
or BRT or anything else. It simply means that we are going to
match the Federal money that ' s required to balance out the
contract with HDR, the consultants working with us and HRT, to
finish the Federally mandated Environmental Impact Statement,
NEPA-driven process .
The money that you are considering appropriating next week
3
will provide the necessary funds to complete the work. That
work will be completed in Draft form about a year from now.
And in about December 2011 time frame is where the first real
decision and commitment will be made, and that would be the
selection of a Locally Preferred Alternative . Nothing you ' re
going to do next week commits you in any way, shape, or form
to any of those outcomes .
So, what we wanted to do today is just sort of briefly go
through some of these issues with you, again, let you know how
we ' ve been involved to date and will continue to be involved
as we move forward. We believe this is one of the most
strategic activities that the City has ever embarked upon. We
take it very seriously. We ' re fully engaged and we ' re excited
about the possibility of moving forward.
The agenda here, the background, a little bit about the HRT,
or HDR contract with HRT, there will be some acronyms , and I
think I know what most of them stand for, and then we ' ll try
to get through some of that . Who the City team is, public
involvement, we pride ourselves over the past several years as
being very supportive and encouraging of public involvement in
all of the Planning activities that we ' re doing, whether it ' s
the Comprehensive Plan, the various SGA ' s efforts, and this is
no difference . We have found that that is the right thing to
do . It has resulted in a great deal of public support for
these endeavors, and certainly it ' s one of the hallmarks of
the FEIS over and beyond what ' s normally required in the NEPA
process . So, we ' re very happy about how that is all detailed
out, and that ' s included in the scope of work in the contract
with HRT and HDR.
A little bit about the relationship between this effort and
what we ' ve been up to over the past couple of years, with
respect to the Comprehensive Plan, our SGA work, and the
support we ' ve gotten for all of those activities , the vision,
and the relationship with mass transit through that very same
corridor that links all of them except for Burton Station,
Burton Station is a bit to the north, but the Resort Area,
Pembroke, and the Newtown SGA work which is currently
underway, are strung along this corridor that we ' re talking
about and going to be exploring in great detail in the
upcoming months and years .
Trail capability, I know some of you are real interested in
the opportunities that this may afford for bikeways and
trails . The Norfolk-Southern corridor is 66-feet wide, which
is sufficient for double trackage, if the Light Rail
alternative is selected, infrastructure, drainage, so forth,
and trails . We have a wealth of right-of-way to work within
4
to accomplish multiple transportation activities . As I ' ve
said to you before, I believe, and in other venues, we have an
embarrassment of riches in Virginia Beach with respect to this
Norfolk-Southern corridor .
An 11-mile, straight-as-an-arrow, fully-intact, rail corridor
right through the heart of Virginia Beach, right through the
heart of our redevelopment, our Strategic Growth Areas . If
you could have asked for a better place, I don ' t know where it
would have been to find such a right-of-way and such an
opportunity, so we ' re very blessed with that and very well
positioned, in my opinion, to engage in a Federal competitive
grant process along with other major cities in this country to
develop these kinds of systems . I think our Planning efforts
are really positioning us favorably, and we ' ll know a little
bit more about that as this process matures in the ensuing
years .
Part of the background to where we are goes back to Delegate
Tata ' s bill in the General Assembly a couple of years ago,
known as HB6028 , which directed Hampton Roads Transit and the
Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transit to initiate a
study, which is this study, to advance the project for
solicitations of proposals under the Federal Government ' s New
Starts process . That ' s what we ' re about today. We ' re
honoring the State mandated activity that was authorized by
the bill and other initiatives that we 've had. We began,
we ' ve been working on this process with the consultants . We
were on the selection panel to choose the consultant for this
process . We were on the policy and technical advisory
committees that see the effort proceed. We have input every
step of the way, and we ' ll continue to do so as part of the
process .
The graphic there is just a highlight showing this
straight-as-an-arrow 11-mile corridor right through the heart
of our city from Newtown Road all the way to the Resort Area .
A lot of work to be done . So far, since May of last year,
work has been proceeding along the purpose and need for the
project, the description of alternatives, and those would be
BRT, LRT, or Light Rail, and Expanded Bus services . It ' s
typical for what is required under a NEPA process and
Environmental Impact Statement .
Traffic Data Collection, Grade Crossing Analysis , we don ' t
know yet how many at-grade or elevated crossings in Virginia
Beach will be necessary. That work will be undertaken as part
of this effort, as will Capital Cost Estimating. It ' s way
premature to estimate at this point what the engineering
capital and operating costs for such a system might be . It
t I
5
4
depends on a number of things from environmental to
engineering to the number of stations and so forth. All of
that will develop as part of the work that continues .
The East End Alignment Alternatives , as we deviate
approximately off the right-of-way at Birdneck Road, generally
speaking, we have a couple of different alignment options to
get us up to 19th Street . Those would be explored. That ' s
what ' s meant by the East End Alignment bullet . Trail
Compatibility Analysis , we really are interested in exploring
that . As I mentioned, the right-of-way is sufficient to
accommodate it . So, we 've engaged all of our community
interests who have been working with us in the SGA' s and the
Comprehensive Plan on the issue of Bikeways and Trails , and
they' re already involved in this effort , as well .
This is a list of additional work to be completed, as part of
this effort . As you can see, it ' s very extensive and that
speaks to the duration and the schedule of this project as it
moves forward. Again, this is information that was taken from
Mr . Shucet ' s briefing to you. This talks about the schedule
and the next steps . The important highlights here are roughly
December of this year we should have a pretty ready, almost
completed, Draft of the EIS in the spring, and our review and
the other stakeholders ' review. We then submit it in
April/May of next year to the FTA. They will take whatever
time they need to give it a thorough review, just like they do
in all of the similar projects throughout the country, and as
was the case in Norfolk, as well . That takes time .
Public Hearings and, again, as I mentioned to you at the
beginning of my remarks, the selection of a Locally Preferred
Alternative, or LPA, as they know in the trade, will occur on
or around December of 2011 . That ' s where we as a City and as
a community make our first real policy decision with respect
to the alternative we want to advance in the process . So,
again, you ' d look forward to that if we continue with this
effort, long about fall or winter of 2011 .
After that, then we get into the Final Environmental Impact
Statement . That ' s after the Federal reviews and so forth.
That gets started in the Preliminary Engineering, if all of
the work done to date at that time passes muster with the FTA
and the other funding partners . And we get into refining some
of the tasks and data that was developed as part of the work
up until then . The next steps, again, here the important
piece is fall/winter 2014 , where we get our Record of
Decision. That ' s sort of the no go/go signal with respect to
proceeding into the Final Design stage and a real serious work
of funding, designing, and constructing whatever the
6
alternative happens to be .
To assure you that we ' re fully engaged, these are two of the
Committees that I mentioned earlier with the local
representatives . Obviously, Mr . Wood, Mr . Uhrin, Mr . Spore,
Mr. Styles, Mr. Herbert, and then many departments that have a
stake in this are all onboard right now. We have been
meeting. We have had a series of meetings, to date . That
would be your Management Committee . We 've had two of those
meetings already. We will meet regularly during the course of
the project . Concurrent with that is a Technical Committee .
You see there the various departments and agencies that are
the primary actors that will be working on the technical
aspects of the project .
Public Involvement, we 've had a number of meetings, to date,
involving our public . You ' ll see some of the photographs
there of the meetings we 've had. We ' ve had a number of
Station Area Workshops , for example; many more to come . Those
have been very, very, interesting. The process is a process
very similar to the one we have been utilizing with the Comp
Plan and with the SGA work; very hands on, very intimate with
the public . And we have found a great deal of support and
satisfaction for the way our public involvement piece is
rolling out .
Obviously, this is more than simply a transportation project .
It relates intimately with our land-use visions, our Economic
Development strategies, and I believe is pivotal to the
success of the Comprehensive Plan with its redevelopment
orientation and our SGA' s with their redevelopment
orientation, as well . It ' s very fortuitous . The plans are
aligned. We ' re really excited about where we are, in terms of
the Comprehensive Plan, the SGA work, and this EIS process
really couldn ' t have been better .
There, you see some quotes from the Comprehensive Plan that
relate . As you know, we have finished three SGA plans, to
date. We are nearing completion in a couple of months of the
Newtown one . Newtown is the first SGA that a Light Rail or
BRT system will go through as it enters Virginia Beach and it
goes right through the heart of that particular part of our
city. Beyond that , we ' re looking at Rosemont, Lynnhaven, and
Hilltop, also strung along the corridor as we proceed through
our regiment of Strategic Growth Area development .
Here are just some images that have come out of those efforts,
what things might look like with transit designed into our
streetscape, our density, and our land use in these areas .
Here in a moment, in the next slide you will see the typical
7
section, as we call such things, which will demonstrate the
fact that within the 66 feet of right-of-way that we ' re
looking to purchase from Norfolk-Southern we can accommodate
dual tracking utilities and a trail within that same corridor .
These are some quotes that we 've pulled out of publications
relevant to the regional interest in the project, and we offer
those to you for your consideration as you move forward.
We ' re getting a lot of phone calls and e-mails from numerous
interests and individuals who are interested and want to be
involved in the outcome of this effort .
These are up-and-running systems . To the left, those cities
are already up and running with the BRT-type alternative . The
ones on the right are already up and running with Light Rail
systems . We ' ve been to many of those, watched them work. The
results are very encouraging, in terms of ridership, and
especially in terms of economic development and land-use
redevelopment . Here ' s our competition. As I mentioned to you
earlier, we ' re not the only one out there interested in
Federal money to develop such projects . These projects are
several years ahead of us in the effort, committed to doing
exactly what we ' re on the brink of committing to . There ' s not
enough money to fund all of them. So, those which will be
successful will be those that are committed, that have done
their homework, that are prepared to move forward. That ' s
just a list of the New Starts funding in 2011 and the
competition in the league that we ' re in right now.
Again, these are just some graphic examples of similar systems
that are up and running in urban environments around the
country. They fit in nicely with the texture of the urban
streetscape and environment that we ' re trying to achieve .
They should look a lot to you like those illustrations, those
graphic illustrations that I showed you a few slides earlier .
It really does end up looking like the artist ' s concept and
the planner ' s concept . There ' s a little bit of detail on a
few of them.
Again, next week' s appropriation will be adequate to see us
through the completion of the EIS process . We will not be
back to you for additional funds to accomplish that . Work is
already underway to position us to get the necessary follow on
a hundred percent Federal money to take us to the next step,
if we choose to do it .
MAYOR SESSOMS: Bob, then Bill?
COUNCILMAN DYER: Thank you. Jack, good presentation.
Let ' s not kid ourselves . This is a
8
very important thing. It ' s not my intention to throw a wet
blanket on it, but I think we 've got to discuss certain things
here as a deliberative body to make sure that we ' re doing the
right thing for the right reason. And I guess my concern
comes with the process and the timing over everything here .
First of all, the cost of the study, $6 million, seems
astronomical . And if we ' re in the process of renegotiating
other contracts downward, especially in this economy, I think
we should make a better effort . We were just blindsided on
this, and here we are getting ready to get up for the vote on
that, and I think we have to show our citizens some due
deliberation. The question is, why the rush? I understand
that there ' s some timelines in here, but just a couple of
things to think about .
First of all , given the chaos and credibility problems with
HRT and the upcoming investigation, once again, I think we 've
got to show from Virginia Beach ' s point of view that we ' re
credible and we ' re going to do things in the right and
deliberative way and not just rush into things . The other
question I have is with the validity and reliability of the
study given the unpredictability of our economy. This study
will be done around 2011 . Where is the economy going to take
us? Is it going to change our Strategic Plan at all? We
don ' t know that yet .
Once again, we ' re not even sure if the funding may be
available for the Right-of-Way Acquisition. There ' s a lot of
unknowns that we have out there, and I 'm afraid that if we
move too quickly and there ' s too many changes, the report may
be obsolete . We might have this $6 million report that may
not be able to hold water or be sustainable over the long
term. If we look at what ' s going on with the Military, we may
be losing a carrier group or two in this region. The entire
mission of the Navy may be changing, and that ' s 45% of our
gross national product out there . What ' s going to happen with
the long-term debt nationally and a lot of things with the
banking crisis? If we go ahead, are we going to be able to
get the bank loans and everything to do this? We don ' t know
that yet . And the other thing is, too, absent the fact that
we really don ' t have a comprehensive regional transportation
plan, this is only a part and parcel thing . I think it ' s go
to be part of the whole big-picture scenario .
I guess, in summary, I just want to say that until we get a
handle on what ' s going on in our own budget, what ' s coming
down, what other gifts we have coming from Richmond, some of
the unpredictability there, I 'm just going to be reluctant to
commit right now to spend a lot of our tax money on something
9
that maybe I just think we may be rushing into .
MAYOR SESSOMS : Thank you. Bill?
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Did you get your questions answered?
I know you had two questions in
there .
COUNCILMAN DYER: No, that ' s okay. Just, I 'm more, I
guess, I want to --
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Philosophical?
COUNCILMAN DYER: Yes .
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: In the first three slides, you
threw out a bunch of acronyms I ' ve
just never heard before, so I 'm going to ask you to define
those, and then I ' ll ask you a couple of questions on top of
that . I 've got BRT, got LRT. "FEIS" , is that Feasibility and
Environmental Impact Study?
JACK WHITNEY: Federal Environmental Impact -- Final
Environmental Impact Study.
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Final?
JACK WHITNEY: Final . DEIS is the Draft
Environmental Impact Study. Those
are NEPA terms .
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Okay. What ' s NEPA?
JACK WHITNEY: National Environmental Policy Act .
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: National Environmental Policy Act . I
know what HRT is, but what is HRTDC,
Slide 3 , I believe it was?
JACK WHITNEY: Hampton Roads Transit District
Commission.
COUNCILMAN WOOD: It ' s backwards, though. It ' s TDCHR.
JACK WHITNEY: And anticipating your next one,
VDRPT?
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: VDRPT?
JACK WHITNEY: Virginia Department of Rail and
10
Public Transit, a State agency.
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: And PPTA?
JACK WHITNEY: Public Private Transportation Act .
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: VBTES, again, all in the first 4
slides?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: That ' s Virginia Beach Transit
Extension Study.
JACK WHITNEY: That ' s this study we ' re talking
about .
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Okay. That ' s this study. Okay.
Now, I ' d like to say I really
understand it all now, but I still don' t, but I 've got four
questions that kind of build on each other . One is , what
happens if we don ' t put the money in? Will HRT fund this?
Will Norfolk fund this? So, I guess , that ' s kind of the first
question .
JACK WHITNEY: Here ' s what I think will happen. If
we don ' t match the Federal money,
that money -- the work will stop, the consultant ' s work will
stop. The money could be redirected to other projects that
might be willing to step forward with the same match; Norfolk,
maybe, or the Naval Base phase, Chesapeake, perhaps , or
somebody else .
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: So, in a $6 . 6 million study, if we
don ' t put $244 , 500 , everything stops?
JACK WHITNEY: Yes .
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Is there something in writing
somewhere, specific language that
says the City of Virginia Beach must match these Federal
dollars, or does it say --
JACK WHITNEY: That ' s part of the grant --
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: -- HRTDC has to do it, or does it
say --
JACK WHITNEY: It ' s a local project .
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Okay. But does it specifically say?
11
JACK WHITNEY: We are the local sponsor . We will
match. We will match.
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: So, it says in this, specifically, we
will match?
JACK WHITNEY: In the grant application agreement
with FTA that the match will come
from the local sponsor .
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Okay. Being, Virginia Beach? Being,
HR --
JACK WHITNEY: Being, Virginia Beach.
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Okay. So, specifically, it says in
writing that Virginia Beach has to
match these dollars . Okay. That ' s my question.
MAYOR SESSOMS: Thank you. Glenn, then Barbara, then
Jim?
COUNCILMAN DAVIS: You know, this is obviously a very
tough decision. I think, if HRT had
come to us a year ago and said "you know, guys, we have a $6
million study, it ' s going to take $240, 000 of matching dollars
to get the $6 million study done" , it would have passed pretty
close to unanimously. Unfortunately, we were misled or lied
to, pick whatever term you want, and we were told we didn ' t
have to put any money up. Now, we ' re in the eleventh hour on
this thing, we started it, and we ' re faced with the situation
where we ' re all upset . We ' re all frustrated. The citizens
are angry. The citizens are frustrated, but I think some of
it is a little misdirected. They' re angry and frustrated at a
situation in leadership that no longer exists .
I think that the leadership that has been put in place has a
lot of credibility. A lot of the State leaders have looked to
the new CEO in times past with regards to VDOT, and I think
those experiences have spoken for themselves . My thought is,
in an economic time such as we ' re facing, and Bob is right ,
times are tough, there ' s one thing we all know for certain,
that Virginia Beach will be here next year, and it will be
here five years from now and it will be here ten years from
now. And we have to plan for the future regardless of how
tight things are today, and in these economic times we 've got
a Governor who has said we won ' t raise taxes . We have to be
careful of peoples ' wallets, but we have to make sure we plan
for rail, and he ' s working on High Speed Rail, which is how
much he believes in it , and I think that that ' s the same
12
mentality we need to take at the City level that we have to
realize some things, even though times are tough, we ' re going
to be here in five years, and it ' s the planning today that
solves the problems of tomorrow.
The Navy issue, I agree, we might be losing a carrier, but one
of the slides up there just spoke about how, and I didn ' t see
it quick enough to get the Admiral ' s name, but the Admiral is
quoted as "this is a readiness issue" . So, if we ' re scared of
losing one carrier, I don ' t know how many we lose if we don ' t
start solving the transportation issues . The Navy has been
talking to us for quite some time now. So, I ' d hate to see us
forgo $240, 000, which is citizens ' money. We obviously have
an obligation to watch over that money, to spend it wisely,
but this is being spent wisely.
And if we don ' t fund it, there ' s a mentality going around that
someone else will step up and fund it . And there ' s that
business mentality of sometimes it ' s proper to play chicken
and let ' s see who blinks first . I don ' t know if this is the
right time to go play chicken and lose $6 million in funding,
stop the study completely, risk losing the additional funding
on the back side, and put this in the vault for a year or two
years . And I knew it was competitive for money; I didn ' t
realize it was that competitive for money out there on rail .
I don ' t think this is going to sit there and wait for us in
the future .
MAYOR SESSOMS : Barbara?
COUNCIL LADY HENLEY: Well, this has been an issue that
we are facing that we didn' t know we
were going to face .
MAYOR SESSOMS: We didn ' t create this one .
COUNCIL LADY HENLEY: And I didn ' t know until last Tuesday
morning that this was going to be an
issue, and a lady called me and was telling me all about it,
and I hadn ' t seen the newspaper . So, I told her that I didn ' t
know anything, and I know I sounded really dumb and I had to
apologize to her . The way this came to us certainly wasn' t an
ideal fashion, and ever since I read that newspaper article
last Tuesday morning I 've been debating this issue. I think
it would be a great issue to debate, the pros and the cons,
because there ' s certainly some on each side .
One of the things , kind of coincidently, we got our final copy
of the Comprehensive Plan in our Agenda Package Friday, and I
have been rereading a lot of that and it is so heavy on
13
transit-oriented development . And we all voted for this in
December, and if we didn ' t believe in transit and
transit-oriented development, we never should have adopted
this Comprehensive Plan. All of our SGA' s -- not all of them,
but most of our SGA' s are built on the concept . We 've already
completed and accepted the Pembroke and the Oceanfront SGA and
are almost ready to do and accept the Newtown; all very heavy
on transit-oriented development .
Then when we get to the transportation part of the Master
Plan, there ' s a whole section that says that we will develop a
strategy to implement the findings of the Virginia Beach
Transit Extension Alternatives Analysis and Draft
Environmental Impact Statement scheduled for completion in
2010 . So, we have an error there. And then all the things
that we would do when this study is complete, I mean, it ' s
just throughout this whole document . So, it ' s almost that if
we are going to abandon the idea of transit, a transit
corridor that ' s a backbone-type system, we really have to
start over with our Comprehensive Plan because all of the
things that then come about, the stability of our
neighborhoods, the ability to direct development into areas
where we have the infrastructure, it just really weakens and
in some cases goes away.
Now, with the Comprehensive Plan, we certainly had heavy
involvement . We had, what, seventeen meetings around the city
when we were developing the Comprehensive Plan . I didn ' t
certainly go to all of them. I know I went to three in my
district, but I was really amazed at the people that I heard
talking about the need for transit . And then, of course, when
we had the final meetings we also had meetings around the
city, so we had heavy involvement . And I didn ' t hear anybody
come down when we were getting ready to adopt this
Comprehensive Plan and say we shouldn ' t have this reliance on
transit; I just didn ' t hear it, and we just have adopted it .
Now, I know, and you mentioned, Jack, several times the Trail
idea . Being one of the liaisons to the Bikes and Trails
Committee, the Bikes and Trails Committee met just last
Monday, and they spent a good bit of time talking about those
potential trails . As a matter of fact, some of them had
walked the trail with staff in January and were real excited
about what was going to happen, and I really feel bad that I
couldn ' t tell them that this was coming up because last Monday
I didn ' t know about it . But I think if we ' re going to pull
the plug on this whole thing, we really need to have some
opportunity for comment from all of these folks that are
working on it before we were to do such a thing.
14
I agree, this is the worst timing it could possibly be . We 've
got the budget facing us . We don ' t know what ' s coming. We
know it ' s not going to be good. We know that the public
confidence in HRT is badly shaken because of all that ' s been
going on there . So, the timing is horrible, so we can really
debate it from that issue, as well . When we look at that
corridor, we know that the -- so many people in the city, as
the e-mails I 've been getting and I 'm sure what you all have
been getting and the letters that we see to the editor, it
seems to all be focused on Light Rail , and of course the study
is looking at Light Rail but also looking at some other
alternatives . So, this decision to do one or the other or
nothing won ' t be coming until we have the information that
would be generated by this study.
And it ' s important that people understand that we ' re not, I
mean, for example, the right-of-way requiring not only for
Light Rail but it ' s a transportation corridor, it ' s our
opportunity for transportation. And I think the message that
we send with the way we handle this particular issue is so
critical, because I think if we back off we are going to be
sending the message to the State and to the Federal and to the
Federal and to the region that we are not going to be
following through, and, therefore, what commitments they might
have given us are not commitment they have to keep, as well,
and I think that would be disastrous . So, we have just so
many aspects of all of this that we have to weigh.
And I know, Bob, you ' re constantly saying that we 've got to be
concerned just with the core services at this time when we
have difficulty financially, and you ' re right, but I think
transportation is a core service . And we ' re in a pickle,
because the General Assembly really hasn ' t been doing what
they need to do . And if we fail to do what we need to do, I
don ' t know what the future of our city would be . I carry
around in this other packet , this thing, and I know y ' all are
familiar with it, this listing of these transportation
projects that we have out there, and there ' s not one below the
Green Line . And there ' s so many, and we can ' t build these
roads , either .
We talk about, and folks who are anti- particularly talk
about, the amount of cost of Light Rail or BRT or whatever it
might be, and the fact that it won ' t recover the cost , that we
don ' t recover the cost of building these roads, either, and we
can ' t build these roads . We can build precious few of them.
And the funny thing, this project that ' s getting ready to
start here in the Princess Anne District, Princess Anne Road
is going to bid in March, is over $50 million for a couple of
miles . And to acquire the right-of-way to expand that road in
15
a relatively undeveloped area, the right-of-way cost us $19
million. We can ' t acquire right-of-way in this corridor that
we ' re looking at . It ' s just totally beyond any feasible idea .
So, it ' s important that we keep the right-of-way that ' s
already there .
I ' ve heard so many times over the years, why don ' t we use that
southern right-of-way to that railroad that used to go down to
Munden Point to do whatever? Well, the reason we can ' t is
because it was sold to individuals when the Railroad stopped
using it, and that ' s just not an option that I think we can
think about for this particular right-of-way. So, the more I
think about it, the more angles that are out there . They' re
just forever . You can talk about them forever . But I think
what we have to do is we have to make sure that if we go
forward with this that we do it in a fashion that we know that
our interests and the interests of our citizens are protected,
whether we have continuous interim reports, some analysis of
the expenditures .
I think one of you fellows who talked about the cost of the
study, maybe it ' s too high; well, I don ' t know that that ' s the
cost of the study or if it ' s just the amount of the grant that
we ' ve applied for, but I would certainly hope that we ' d make
certain. And I think in some of the news articles this
weekend, we see the new director over there certainly going
toward looking at consultant studies and so forth and making
sure they' re what they ' re supposed to be . I think we need to
determine what it is we would need to do in order to make sure
our interests and the interests of our citizens are protected
if we go forward with this study.
I know one of you mentioned that we don ' t know what the
economy is going to be . We don ' t know what ' s going to happen
with the Military. We don ' t know those things . But I can
tell you one thing, if we stop this study we do know the
answer, and that is we ' re not going to get anything . So, all
around the issue, those are some of the thoughts that I ' ve
been having over the past week and I know it ' s a tough issue .
MAYOR SESSOMS : Thank you. Jim?
COUNCILMAN WOOD: I agree with, frankly, a lot of what
everybody has said here. HRT is
justifiably taking some hits, justifiably so . I don ' t think
that -- anybody who has been involved with that organization,
particularly John and I, know that there have been some
serious issues there . And I think the Commission has taken
the right steps with the new leadership, new very strong
leadership, and the investigation that somebody referenced, I
16
think, Bobby, you referenced it, keep in mind that was at the
request of the new CEO .
COUNCILMAN DYER: That ' s correct .
COUNCILMAN WOOD: He ' s come in, and I was at a meeting
with him on Saturday morning in
Norfolk, and he announced to this group, he ' d already sent an
e-mail out to all the Commissioners, but he announced to this
group, he said, "look, I 'm calling on the Department of
Transportation ' s Inspector General ' s office to take a look at
the way HRT has done business in every aspect" . Now, he ' s got
a little bit more clout, because he basically told them when
he wanted the investigation to start and when he wanted it to
stop and move it along quickly, which is a very good thing .
Bob, you talked about the Navy carriers and the issue with the
Navy. And, Glenn, you said, it was one of those slides, Slide
16 , if you want to flip in there, and it ' s from the current
Commander Navy Region Mid-Atlantic , which is Admiral Boensel .
There are at least four previous Commander Navy Region
Mid-Atlantic, Commanders Navy Region Mid-Atlantic, I guess,
who have written similar letters . I have copies of all those
letters, if anybody would like to see them, where they have
expressed their support for this . The Navy really, really,
really wants a connection between Oceana and the Naval
Station; that is their ultimate goal . They see this extension
as the first part of it and that ' s why it is .
From my perspective, and I watched something online today
where a group of folks were talking about what the major
issues were facing the region, and they talked about the
carrier, whether or not we lose a carrier and another one gets
decommissioned or what have you, so this Council has tried to
be as Navy friendly as possible . And I think this is
something when the Navy says this is a readiness issue for us ,
I think we need to take heed to it . When he says it ' s a
readiness issue, he is specifically talking about Light Rail .
Whether or not Light Rail is the ultimate Locally Preferred
Alternative, LPA, which is another acronym, Bill, in there, is
another issue .
Going to Bill ' s comment about what ' s going to happen if we
don ' t right now spend this money, it ' s a simple business cash
flow analysis . They need cash at certain points along the
line, and this $1 . 2 million gets us to the next part where
this next grant kicks in, and the next grant kicks in and it
goes on from there . So, that ' s the way it is on that . So,
hopefully, that answers the one question. And when you said,
talking about the local sponsor, Jack was talking about that,
17
whether the local sponsor is HRT or the City of Virginia Beach
it doesn' t really matter . Ultimately, HRT is funded by the
localities and by State and Federal money. We could have as
many buses on the road as we wanted if we put more money in
HRT. They would put a bus on every street if we wanted to
fund it . That ' s not an issue . But it ' s a balancing of
priorities , and, as Barbara said, Transportation is a core
service and it ' s just a question of how much we want to fund
transit .
I ' ve had conversations with the Secretary of Transportation,
Sean Connaughton, who has local government experience, as many
of you all know, and was also the Maritime Administrator for
President Bush, and also with Former Congresswoman Thelma
Drake, who was the head of that agency, Department of Rail and
Public Transit . The State feels very strongly in support of
moving forward with these studies for the simple fact that
this is a strategic decision for us . This is , as Glenn said,
which I thought was a really good statement, we don ' t know
what ' s going to happen with the economy in six months or a
year, but we know Virginia Beach is still going to be here .
And we also know, looking at these slides, that no matter
what, nothing is going to get built on here for several years .
But if we don ' t move forward and if we don ' t study this, we ' re
not going to know anything, and other people are going to grab
our money. It ' s pretty clear out there, there ' s a lot of
competition, and I didn ' t realize there was that many. I
heard a lot less . I see New York and California going against
us . They've got some pretty strong lobbyists, so it ' s going
to be tough. But I think, ultimately, if we boil it down to
the core factor, it ' s a study, yes , we don ' t want to spend the
money, but we have to look at the alternative . If we don ' t
spend the money, this isn ' t going to be any cheaper for us if
we delay it a year; probably cost us more money. Somebody
else is going to get this grant, and it makes us so we ' re not
really thinking long term, strategically. So, that ' s my
comment .
MAYOR SESSOMS : Thank you, Jim. Bill?
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Is this $6 . 6 million contract a firm
fixed price one, because we were told
last year the $5 . 7 million, which was the cost they brought to
us last year, was a firm fixed price contract?
JACK WHITNEY: The 5 . 7 is .
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Is a firm fixed?
18
JACK WHITNEY: The additional funds have to do with
other costs , legal costs, surveying,
anticipated requirements coming out of the FTA review for
additional work, whatever it might be, but the 5 . 7 is a fixed
contract .
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: So, the next piece of it, the
$900, 000, we ' re not sure if that ' s
going to be fixed?
JACK WHITNEY: That ' s the 80% Federal contribution
to our 20% match that goes into the
funding of that 5 . 7 fixed contract .
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: So, last year the study was 5 . 7 .
This year it ' s 6 . 6 . Hopefully, next
year it ' s not going to increase .
JACK WHITNEY: Contract is 5 . 7 , unless we add stuff
that we want to it and expand the
scope .
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Okay. The 6 . 6 , then, is what?
JACK WHITNEY: The 6 . 6 is the HDR contract, plus the
additional funds which will be
necessary to support the administrative costs, potential legal
costs during the course of the effort, and anticipate what FTA
may ask for in terms of additional studies or documentation.
MAYOR SESSOMS: Bob?
COUNCILMAN DYER: Thank you. I think this is a healthy
discussion .
MAYOR SESSOMS: This is a great discussion.
COUNCILMAN DYER: This is what the Workshops do,
exchanges ideas and opens some eyes
and is very helpful . I do want to address something that I
just feel strong about, that, first of all, Mrs . Henley, the
most congested road on that list right there is right in my
District, and I ' d like to see a Comprehensive Plan. Maybe
this will flesh out in a study. I don ' t know.
But I think we really need a full regional Comprehensive
Transportation Plan to really give meaning to what we ' re
trying to do here and justify. For instance, if we were able
to get High Speed Rail , that would be helpful because that
would spur the economic development for the Strategic Growth
19
Areas and things of that nature. Once again, what I 'm talking
about necessarily, delay, I know sometimes in politics that ' s
a bad word, but putting things on the back burner sometimes is
not a bad idea . I think our friends in Norfolk are doing that
now with the Courthouse . That ' s a hot political issue for
them right now, but they don ' t have the money, and so they ' re
risking a lawsuit and everything else .
The point I 'm trying to make is that by being slow and
deliberate, I think a lot of people have a problem when we get
blindsided, all the unexpected costs come up . I think that
happened in Norfolk and they don ' t want to see it here . And
my fear is that if we ' re not at least deliberate about this
that we have to set the tone that we ' re going to be deliberate
about things and have some checks and balance systems on this .
That ' s fundamentally what I 'm saying, so I don ' t think
necessarily delay is inappropriate at this time . And then,
once again, until we really get a handle on what our true
budget is going to be, I just think it would be helpful to be
stewards of the folks ' money.
Glenn, you ' re right . We have to look forward to economic
development and build a future, but right now we ' re not sure
where that future is going to lie. It could be, hey listen, I
hope I 'm wrong. I truly hope that I 'm wrong, but I don ' t see
this economy turning around any time soon. We may be looking
at a commercial bubble next and everything that could skew
this whole thing. And while we should approach the Strategic
Growth Areas and approach the vision, we have to realize that
the economy may change the time lines on this . And Jim is
right, we ' re not going to see HRT anytime soon. Probably, if
we approved it today, it would probably take seven years or so
to get up and running. And if I recall at the State of the
Region, I do believe Dr . Koch said that before Light Rail is
viable, it ' s going to be a couple of decades before it really
gets up and running.
So, the point is , as we go forward we 've got to remember all
along the way somebody is going to have to pay for all of this
stuff, whether it be the study, whether it be the
implementation of any plan that we 've got to do . One of the
things that we highlighted in the Blue Ribbon Task Force is
that we just make sure that we do things based on our folks '
ability to pay, is all I 'm basically saying .
MAYOR SESSOMS: John? Thank you, Bob.
COUNCILMAN UHRIN: Thank you. Well, first off, there is
a Comprehensive Regional
Transportation Plan that was participated in by all of the
* 20
cities on the south side and on the Peninsula . Mr . Mayor, I ' d
like to request that we have a briefing on that here probably
in the next month or so . Mark, you can probably help
facilitate that, but I think it would be beneficial for all of
us and the public, as well .
MAYOR SESSOMS : Have you got that noted, Mr . Spore?
Thank you, sir. I saw you noting it .
COUNCILMAN UHRIN: We 've been talking for several years
about the importance of the data
points we would get from this EIS, and with Phil Shucet at the
helm I 'm very confident at the end of the day that we ' re going
to have reliable meaningful data that comes out of the study.
He gave assurances to this Council and I 'm very confident that
he meant it and he ' ll deliver, that he ' s not going to be
coming to this Council to help fund any more of the study,
that this is the only time he ' s coming to the well .
But I think it ' s important to note that if we do vote to
approve the funding, the data points are not even going to be
available for another year. And we cannot compete for any
Federal funding for any transit study in that corridor,
whether it ' s BRT or whether it ' s a bike trail or whether it
happens to be Light Rail without those data points . So, if we
delay it then we know that there is yet another year that
we ' re not even going to be at the table to try and come up
with real transit alternatives and start to build that . And
for that reason, I 'm not happy about it, I am very annoyed
that we even have to consider this, but I certainly do not
want to have a situation where we are a year, two years, three
years from now and we do not -- it limits our opportunities to
do something that really needs to happen at a point in time
because we didn ' t fund the study today.
MAYOR SESSOMS : Questions or comments? I ' ll
conclude, then, if that ' s all right?
First off, Jack, thank you for doing this . As you said this ,
has been great . I don ' t think I could sit here and disagree
with any of the comments made . I respect every comment that
was made . I also want Jack to know that he didn ' t create --
the City of Virginia Beach didn' t create this . You 've done a
great job trying to bring us up to date on good information.
The key thing that stays in my mind if we don ' t move forward
is getting the funding for the purchase of the right-of-way.
I don ' t have the answer for you, as I raise this to you, but I
would sit back and say to you that I think they would at least
expect us to move forward with the completion of the EIS if we
21
were to get $20 million from the State, as has been promised.
I think they were expecting us to move forward with a study
that was already in place and we expect to be completed.
For the fighting of funds at the State level for these types
of projects, I sure don ' t want to give them excuses not to
fund that $20 million. I don ' t think anyone at this table
disagrees with the importance of us acquiring that
right-of-way. I know that I don ' t want to even give an
inkling of a reason for them not to complete what they ' ve
promised to us .
The Military issue that Jim Wood just brought up, referring to
Admiral Boensel ' s letter in black and white stating how
important Light Rail was in dealing with readiness, I just had
lunch with the Commanding Officer at Oceana, I guess, a week
ago Friday. I 'm going to try to do that quarterly just to
make sure we have open communication, we don ' t have things to
blow up on us or surprises . The first thing on his agenda was
"we want to be tied to Light Rail" ; Oceana Commanding Officer,
"we need to be tied into Light Rail" . Again, knowing how
important we are about the Navy and maintaining the Navy in
Virginia Beach, in Norfolk, in our region, I cannot overstate,
these are comments that have come to me when I was up at the
Pentagon and also when I had Admiral Harvey in front of
Governor McDonnell, Governor Elect at the time, it was a few
days before he got sworn in, guess what was on his poster
board that he was making his presentation to the Governor
about? Transportation.
And I 'm so delighted, this isn ' t just about Light Rail , this
study. This is about the Bike Path. This is about other
types of paths . I am so sorry that we ' re in this situation,
and I think that ' s why we ' re questioning this so hard, as we
should. We were told we didn ' t have to fund it, and, yes, now
we ' re being told that we need to if we want to move forward,
$245 , 000 on a total investment in excess of $6 million. And
as Bob has stated so clearly, the timing could not be worse .
But at the same time, I ' ll conclude this way. I do think
there is a need for a bit of a breather here, but I think the
breather occurs while the study goes on . This study is going
to take a good while . The information they' re showing, it ' s
going to be the end of 2010, early 2011 , before we get
information. I think that allows us to be getting information
prepared to be brought to us . It allows HRT to be able to
prove they can move forward with Light Rail in an organized
fashion and a proper fashion and in an efficient manner . And
I would hope during that time frame, I 'm going to be hoping
for the best , and I think everyone at this table is going to
22
be hoping for the best .
Finally, I think, we can ' t forget two things . We 've got two
individuals that serve on HRT, one of them is the Chairman. I
think everyone at this table respects their representation,
and in particular, speaking about Jim Wood, he has taken a
tremendous hit through that process showing tremendous
leadership, in my opinion, and I think in everyone ' s opinion
at this table . And I think every now and then we really have
to step up and support our leadership because we respect each
other . And sometimes we really don' t want to do something,
and there ' s some good reasons not to do it because we were
told we didn ' t have to, but I think when it ' s all said and
done, I think we ' ve got two fine people doing a good job and I
hope I can help them next week in moving this project forward.
Thank you for your presentation.
JACK WHITNEY: Quite welcome, Sir .
MAYOR SESSOMS : And, Mr. Spore?
CITY MANAGER: I ' d just like to add one piece of
information that might help a little
bit . It ' s awful easy to disparage HRT, and I just want to put
in a good word for them in terms of why we are where we are
right now. They in good faith, I think, when they were out
here a year ago represented that in fact there would be no
cost to the City and they were going to fund the study, and
they, in fact , applied for the grant for the full, I believe,
it was $6 . 9 million at that time -- no, $5 . 9 million, excuse
me, at that time .
Without getting into all the alphabet soup, the agency and the
funds that they applied for made those grant awards , and
because of the competition they weren ' t given the full amount
that they had requested; that ' s why there ' s this shortage
right now, the $1 . 2 million. To their credit, they said
there ' s another pot of money we can go after and they were
able to get that grant, but that ' s a different pot from a
different source and it requires a local match. Because HRT
does not have an independent funding source, they have to rely
on the cost participation agreement, sharing agreement, that
we signed back in the ' 90s and ask us for the money.
So, I just want to kind of put some perspective on this . That
we were misled and that they did that intentionally, I don ' t
believe that is the case . They, in fact, did try to get the
full grant amount and because of the competition for those
funds they did not get those . So, that ' s why there ' s this
23
gap . To their credit, they did hustle around and find another
grant source, and it unfortunately requires a local match and
they don ' t have it .
MAYOR SESSOMS: Thank you for your comments .
(Whereupon, the discussion of this matter was
concluded. )
3
CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFINGS
ELECTRONIC DISPLAY SIGN(LED)
REGULATIONS
5:01 P.M.
Mr. Whitney, Director —Planning, along with Bill Macali — City Attorney's Office, provided the
attached presentation. A copy of the Verbatim Transcript is also attached and made a part of
this record.
February 16, 2010
e-
(:-.)(]
O
(N
LC)
c--I
N
...i'•:.:I.i.....i:P":•1';.:IIi:i],:iii:i';',:iii:i;'•.;i:'::;i::•••:•ii::!:•:••••-• ' \I.V14•4111 ig '''':.
L 0 w o C 4) >O O >' Nr *. "T .
L L ���k \W ti i 'r
�( ti w i
03 ♦V 1 1 p J
c) 03 o
_J Cif O .-C3 C O1 i.A• �'11•ff ^ trrm '
_C O O CC ! ItII
•ci)i_ N c c, �r •
moo � � � � r
m 0 z ¢ o
«1 a' o ter
•- _ •
CD N ti U ti O L fr l . . ..
� CJO cOO -0C 00 (U
._ CA E •2 O7 C 0 0) 1_ >
1_ riN
O O O
c 7 -F {k r y:
O o_ L ..,..... 4
•
f^ "c ( ...,:...1,. 'or .�
fn• Z
:,
—
d• L_ . N
E
" oi:/+QU ....• W .I
41-'x'4''":
0.
LLJ �:. a �.,k r a'
�� V
C
CD
0
N
lD
e-I
N
;ii• • .�i,.••.•,1:..- ,
y
e En f f4
... -7-1.cam !� k f I 'r
, Y s !�if f ,
�3
q •
.. 'Y•
• Cr
69 y
F 0.. C }j•',pnl :�.. I
7 r • I!4j' ..1
Ile).:N i
i
7 L ,
....
.... , 1... ,•_ i iffa-V.it •....
r
t, ..i:4
:'ikil 1 5 ..'r''''',11:4-.._.7-'+'"--. . .
��� � �{ yr . .. ...
‘ A. L,,,,,,.., „...(..,,..................., ..„..ri,! ii::....i'ii
if kg...4-e, ,• ? , , -Ai _. ,..!,, L iti, ,\,
a , .
, - t Ili : t CO 0OL- rn � � uC)
t ;1 � '• :t -Ci C° C O II) 0- N > o
>_ Q (6 C 7
m .hv 4 x } i ` `', O •fn C C w. ,.. N O) O
t
''-'-'4,11,40,-,
$tr :,q'/ l'ti+ii r } . o' (� N (d -0 f� -C (p CC 3
Sir"' pp 4a aa .( m L QC � O '0) � NC OO)
S"F.2 , it. 1 • • t AAki';i t U° ' O LN NO�p o u) .2 � O .C �
m" (i3 �, C O �+
a • :.« m O N N C -p 5 (3 O C O
.114'` —•;-1111114•t '•�� .1'''; `� >:HI ^�' c a��i coo I° c`�i v
Z o
I
cr
0
0
N
LO
a-1
N
0
U t 0 .
T ... ur N C O
O V 4t:v E v w w c :i(§ -----
.
..
art n� o s
I- C V a) •• . .. Y O m Q Q N N L • .. ..
O O C to (� CD `n mr .
°(t (y (n Ea) E «
w cal
7,3„ 2-
a
NL E ' i:i• • � � -6.2- �
CO NI DD-O OC : • : -
Q) c .. ...CU .--6: E � �.� � > U m cmoe _ , w .. ,.
E c-2.05n p Oc O FO $ „ m ° „ o g N O CN 'cO F mVrrnmU •
- EM LOE C0 E1 O c � o
U Oc
K c j rn� c d
Qc3O � mC y C p �-om r .
.
•
U. Q E QO 0 c_ ac cO y my 2 U a m a
� Ua) C I E n `I N >, 0 (n p ,0 CI
g .• cy � aGC
0 pE 2 ZOO E 2.0 CQ m N m o D
� 0
CD ON cc
0 °-
coo U cri0W^ a).°—, ° Ua) a) MC
N
C.2 C cn °, c (Ki a-,E..--,
CO •�.Eroo aCDEc •E.) E co r.o
C ac n.E ° c= c ° S .,
12 - U )Q � UP Qn- > cEW ° • "
p o 0 0 0 3 -
::.
`w E `go
+1),
CL) E a r 'E d ono
.
Eo E m va °
(nC mNNVyU £ N
^, n CU ci " N O dC N C
u
m
a < QEv m v� 0O � OO ,^ P, D 60 Z d ` _
CI c C
a) c O v
a) � -� U) t E
•
-' C C) = CB .0) —. z A :. E
c a `
a.
s O O o o 2 •
0
p 'c O
V
.
Co "J s Oa) v •U a) s T
CQ U .c m a
i- E ms � o o
m
L w
„ .
Q - O C -'-• Cn a) oo •
T[ as _� .c) 0 0" U w - 0 E N
V L- .E 2 o = (Q c O
U O O C
W II. (r) ar C) 0 o O n Q I`' .
Z In
® 0 U N � 15 �
If I) Z � o �
I
c3
O
c-I
O
N
lD
I--I
N
..
O C
LU LU '
(..) :: .,,.. ,. ,
'g '23 U—
_FOa z
a d
w
O 'l C
E
E .N N iCCN o:N �
w U _nQ .uCv
A v " E t
Cc 2 mO `cO E w
• 9NpUEV U
pSO n ~ 0 EE , UWJ
O / Jc o 0 ° „
Z
U 41 O m n U 0 Q O
J >
E E W D
;.::i::••
O x
U m w
CN D N C 1
O o 5 � $ c � c Ri r � i
c j o c g , ..... :.
L.
g p Y g
lit ''i •/-'''' i irler:o'l P :.
,, .z.,..
, 1,041e!..ii
pp
N O L lFIy i i3e
p o Ll -.:11:,,,,.'0 !.4`fix kd, I)i.
d m P N g z Pi'i •+t.9 6xr :. 1' ,36 a 4*N a r
g 8 <u;1 ' 4, fi 'f1.
E q
W N n 2 ¢
';.i.;..: ,
N T �, S
•i co Qr„q uh I 1 R 't:.:14,1,-.1i..';'.1,:::-,,
W 33C -Yi , � of k �S
U V i.j y � p �0 r$Y4t )
I
C
0
N
CV
.. .,1 Q,: j
•
•
Myi ' J • rr.•rtwrsY / , t f r
•,;.;•"-s:—.M S } • k
In.,,i/ 'r1ksu 'fli .,,,'4'x.:,i
�`�•J' itc ".:. A, F
--.,;•:.•• J .. I 6 ,•e~j .,;p.` a\5. �,ly I k jiyr,�� 2r 5 t • ,,,
i, o •
441
L.Z ` " ` r:e .., ,
i',..?:
n t '-'-'7;41-,, \ a;,,,,'I f:
F..
V _.. i± .
• : t,.
i ri
•
r 3
rr
�
ii • •
r , J ., i
c 1 '�S .
A• .. 1;47�y t: r,. �'
\ • r, , " � j
L r• k1s• 3 y p 4r111‘.: ,¢•
777,, }t C'. •1• t. ry V•.;
`�` , • • ' . j.:, •14....,''• `;
d, ,SS • t. *µ{'Vi 3 FIY
u_ .�. i `"+ - k. 5!�S tr•i iii� `?' :ti• — �
• 11
kr
0
-i
0
N
--,_
LD
,_.
N
::::::::If.::::::::::•*::::,;:::::::::::,:.:,:::.:.:.:::.:,..,....,....:::...,,,,....:.:::.,...,:::....,.....„,,..:•......„:„:••4:..,..;:i:.:,.:..,i:...,.,
:•••••.::•:',K.::....:.:,:.:,....,:.::.:•:•::.:::•:.:,.:...,....„•••• .. •
iii.:::iiii::iii.:.:i.:•:ii.i'.iiig,444,k:i?..". i . i.',,-.1,--;-•-i
:,:':',Zi;::::,,r.::i!:?!!::::.:.... ',1Z1';:',. I . LE .',. '.,:,•,.. 0 •,.,-,:i -'N' -; i4n.,.,•.;..., . . . '
..... ..,
,:i.,.••••::.::::::...:1:i::,:::::..... .,..,',...„.:•:—.4.,,,,,,::- i\ c,,, :' 1,'It. • 0..": ' i:': I '.,,
ii,...!....i:r„::::..... .p.,..:-.,....,-* : ,,. 5 , •.'., f 4 ,,.; I'','..!, r, ,,
"i../ , '' 44:'.:''''•''' i',"V. c ' ' 'h
' ... i:'::':: C •••';.‘r4 -• --
is ,!,.. I::;,,.....1.,i , ii-•.•• a)
4. ,..„.:,..,..,?.,,.:,.,,,,.,.... •,.:.:,,,,,..- -.... ,.: ..,...::
1.0007
t N ..:. .. ki fate...', t••• ' . :F:
,4,,, , ,j: . 1...... ., ::.. 1/4...i . 1
,ift,,44.,,Ilmktiffi tx.0 , ,..1
...
120 ;Limi,,,,NstIlt,,,,fif,,..f,•,".....[,•...-_';•;•.j. ,•,•• : •::•:: • ,.N.,. ", 0, ..in . . .. •
•••
ca iii..„, ,....T.(7,,.,..„?........,,,,k-• , f..,,...t...!,:::
•-- ,•-•i4,1,.•••.0•-y.1,, ,••,,,••••••,,i,,..
•••• •• ......
.,,„,,,,•••;7•,:;;;7p.•-,e4,-ql,',,..-.P,••.•,- 11' •-• . ,.."... -- •- -'Nr100•N‘1! -•.,,i 0
•> vor.:i.' :',..ii '.,,,,,,, ',. ..•• .,,,tt'',',.j.-.:;..'
.._ .4,i'.4 ;liel,I.:i--.5Z ',..'--.. i! CI..S.4.4.''',.1f.V f;):;i ..;& - ', • , :i'.
,,,,,,yfpfi•..,.,.......,..,t,.. .1i•
littliiiiitsi 1 1 . ,•,,i:,:
,,c,,,,t,..',.qs•k.. “-..i•-•0 a -f. t.,', - . ' , ,-- :E
u): "'.;;i,t.''''..;(,.,i-it.,',:',,;-:.,1,4',,i'
•
'" .'4;.!1.• '.-
''''-' ".'is.'"* V4Av.,,,,:-._if,i.::'.'••:.1:-• ;
...0 Nva"...-- .'ii,.:f••4:1",'4.1,,, ;•,',3-41 i,;:s.1.•• iri., .• i ' :'::
..1__/ ;.,'74-: fl'4ii-tij-P1'"'''-'''''''1.:, t +a ,.r...'1,,'',.,':.':• At-,.-A 0 Ex • •••, i:
•— •- Nails N-1:-..'., i A-4117,r3Wi.i:;
Nti`1,7, _:.J...... •0.1111731.•''....;;:teei:'," ,-.-.'41'.:''' l'. " r ' .:lit :,:i i
L . .4.:..7y,.).1;'.:.'r;r*••';;' .1:I.i;.1 i•••ti,'!,''.',.:.ti!,,':.i.,'l 4. , .... (13 T".Pil ,';')..I.V.:,,,,,i,...':, .. . .
r . •.• % • ...
0 71";‘....,*IP t 1.,':''.':.: , ••• ,, 'e• , •,''r''''':•\',,,:j...,.,..'. • •••• • . .. '. • •I:;
•••• VR;i44,,It I . '. ' ,... i 1 :::: ILI) A'';',.....i'.'j: .'''44,Nriai 7 i:. • .'; i ' .. ':E
:: • I 1 17 f
' • • '
0 ;dr*!Mk..7. . , . ... . . . [ ,' ;:•i •' . ei',i,'"..•T'-','.-, ;---,-t---r-...— • ' ''. .'‘ i'• ."
-4;':'")••';% ' i' ' , 4—, .'• 1-.•-•:il''i '','"..'..1''. -'• is' . ; ' ' . VI , , ..i:
.—.'.. ..‘,,L 14,,106i, ,, ,-, .
(1) .., I.. . n i','.. . i.:.... D 18..'01,,Ilt:':Z.,,,,,,''... ''''''.
C L,.;'..f,, 7."‘:.: ..,..___..... ., IA! . . - ..4 4 : •':
0 - '. ‘...'...-.• . 1 ..!.
...• ..••
:.:: ..
.i.i•! "."
..•
:,:i..,:i:...*i..:,i:.:..,.::...i..i:i:i:.:...i:..i:...:...:i...,.i:i....,:,i,.i:iii:iiii:ii:::::•••.:i.:i..i,.i...,:::i:.i:,..J:v.i.iii::::.i....::::i.:....: .:...
...„..„•„,•.••......................... ..................•.....„.„...............
„......,0,..,.....,,,,,,,,,......,,, .....•,.,.•... ..,.,,,,,,e.y.,,.............,."...„,,..
.“,..............“....., ......... .‘,..... ...... .,....,.,.
:::11::::::i::::•?.:;:T.,•'::::D...':."';''..........''''..'.....''..1777.'r :'.1 ' I '1 ' ".'
.........:.:i?:.: :.:',:•.: .' '' , ' ' J'''..':. ' ;ie.rki LP.1. :.! 1 ...,...,.................., •
•::':i:1•,:.,:.,:,:',.:•.;.i.:::: ' .,,,: ., ,' ,,‘. 1 5 ." , .,. ,,, ; ,;
i '!',11,q, '..:"..,'i. ::,:N'.:';!1;!•::'i..i. ..:'....., 0 i..•... .' • ' ., . ,,,- ..._, - . :.. . ,.1,
4;11104.',# i.:11 ''.1:' ....,.....
.i..Dij'..:V...'": ,,.!.,..,;±:,',;•"•:,i'.1..:."•:IPWri.%W.Iii • ' I k, )'‘,:'''.•
i'''''' ,.,'• -•,.10.-4'• "4-',7*/- 1.41,!:02 i rte
,i:::i,4, ,,iiii:IV,•-•';(!.::2,5:46.t.418::"...• ,lilt,''''". . :. , . .„..•
• .... . . .. „ • . ...
.,.... . • . _ ,
••
i,,,,,;',7!7::iffi.•117,viii7:4r41 .k .,.T.:7,- -,.,f1, - •:. •
AA.,14.10fittW44-..,01-1,:.-ilfik .it. fl,' , - :, .7 --!,,,,,,‘.L,,..4.,.:4•4:.i...., •.i!.4'"IP" ", '. '...' ..!:,
"03W0414.• •,.'."''''.'4‘'...',.'.4i'...P.';'.-.•''.,-, d tb, 6 . • I
U) '%.:4'.,jf'k'....i!:,,"!"...),,,,,', it fy; .• 0 : .:' ..',,. ;.,.'1,. qi.'..;''',.!... . ,....:',;41.k:...r.t.11ikl--t,.;,' .'. ',,..!;
10441. 4t ..
ci) Fif,j,L1::1 = -•.:,,,,. :.,. ,. ,..,..1.:., ,- ,.. '-. - 1 i i:ii
tt.0 14:it.,47,,,k.-4i ,t.i' •,',. 1 , ;:‘ .. •' ,:.: 0
. , ....'le:I.N'•
1;3
-.1J '..S :* ',.?-:... ../. ' .,,r...,. • • "'''. I.;',..:::::
.•...
. '1:,'''i' '.1," • ' :. !:Y414;;Allf•' ,••'il.;!:;:
E-! •:r....1'-• •••.1•••
_C -!irli.:,,i, 2 I , I ... • 2 t•
i,,,-,,,i4 ei 1 k 114,,'''. •. .11 'IP. ' -1:. ° •.4 fie
';;I:;:;, ' 1:2 ..,_
' , ;''.111117P,r.t.);;; Li•': :'..)';,:...1
C)r— t;'.1.,...;;;41:1 IT ii,.i t . 144kir 4:01; . *.- i••• f. ,.. ...,•,' ' ... •Is.ti,... r;I.;:...:
0 V . ,..4
_.,.._ •,,,,i,r,„,,f it • ti•`;;:::77:,,.pr...'•::;• .:-!,:. Z ..::•.",i':. 41 _ ',''Mil ••,lit'',..:., '!..j.ii:i.i
.4.72 F.:i'.21 7 o • •
' •;.6-' ' . ' " :. 111•••,:i,..;',4';, , Mititt---'BIt''. • ':",":'::
'..,
'',,,I,r4..1.0 ! i ' I ,4',_i':.1.,t te.,A ' •' .' •i' ,':I,:.!•',..
.,.. Ilk, ',,'It, '' • :. '',0'' ''. -• :•'• •
" ''',:•4'ti.'s:''. •
t, r , . " :...,,' .. .. ...,,:;_rti'..2 ',..,...,•,•;',
A-, , or .,....,• • r--•:, i;:, . .. :•,•
. - ...
•
0 ••*,'{.••'P'`.• '7,,,'''''';:t:g;?A'
— ".•-ii10,,,ii,...?'-fi•'441i,... •! :: 1.',g•'cil ..-1 • ' 14
11;1'.. i!. ' ii:
0 ','''''0; v: vfk431-4:`'.,-— I (il
1441.44tir' 0 ';',:.141:L ' u.:.'':(' '4ii,1,.4.::1::.' '' . ': ri--.1.le! ;'
''''' " '` ../ 4:‘,EN- - • .., ,.-,,.f
0 ...tk: . .... . .::.,: !',!".:.
,,,,..,t„..,,,,.....4„...„ r•
C ,„1.:,. ,.„ , , • ' ' • - • I';:• C W.:,.,..r ,i-: ic-..-.‘i.i.'-',.;..:•'f. , , ' .tv..,-!:!:
0 ?::• .'-...,:,,...4,.':t-..... -- 1 i '•...'...4:' 0 .g','. '' •'. :',•-•• .; .1' -, 1•,,,,_ 1,"•:,.tit,,.; .1:
':*r
....
.. ..
..
0
0
N
LD
•
F-
w
2
2
O
U
Z
O
I-
OS 75
w
Qc �
o ....
N � >, o � 5 . :.... ,. ...
o ca tar)
o � va) cn n �
o oEo Eca �a ' .. :.:
c L a) c w (n to .
0 .(7). a
a) _ a) ac
c cc0 Wo — O N o
cQ W a) co .2 o U
+ Q) C8JN .. U a)
v O 0 U ` o� a)
> y a) .c L U
O O C6 O NO _U
w 4)
c U V W a
.0 a) c O a) C S U a) i;i.
(I) O p) a) N V•
O N p 'O
a) . @ U
a) .Q cc c a. cv U a) 0) o •E
Cl. Zoo W E c0O �' W N OE 3 ii•
0 O OO ® 0 OO
2/16/2010
Virginia Beach Transit
Extension Study
Alternative Analysis and Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement
Project Update and Briefing
Virginia Beach City Council Briefing
February 16,2010 ■
Agenda
• Background
• HDR Contract with HRT
• City Team and Committees
• Public Involvement
• City Land-Use Planning Efforts
• East-West Trail Capability
• Schedule and Next Steps
• Regional Interest and Support
• Examples in Other Cities
2
1
2/16/2010
:ac � : •-• - :
State Mandated Study
• Virginia General Assembly passes House Bill 6028 directing HRT to study
expansion of The Tide: July 2008
• Requires HRTDC and VDRPT to initiate study of the project in order to advance
project for solicitation of proposals under FTA's New Starts process and the 1995
PPTA
• VBTES planning and environmental analysis(AA/SDEIS)initiated May 2009
N __,
4
g-1 -
S ✓ MMIb 11r�1
r 1
e".'
3
Project Work Underway
• Purpose and Need Statement (NEPA Requirement)
• Description of Alternatives
• BRT
• LRT
• Expanded Bus
•Traffic Data Collection
• Grade Crossing Analysis
• Capital Cost Estimating Methodology
• East End alignment Alternatives
• Trail Compatibility analysis
4
2
is
2/16/2010
Project Work To Be Completed
• Traffic Analysis
• Operations Planning and Costing
• Prelim. Financial and Funding Strategy
• Ridership Forecasting
• Conceptual Engineering
• Land Use, Socio-Economic, and
Environmental Impact Assessment
• Contingency for Additional Work that may
be required by FTA
5
Schedule and Next Steps
Feb.-Dec. April-May June-July August-December
2010 2011 2011 2011
Complete Public Hearings
Project Completion Completion
Definition: of Draft City of VB Approval
AA/SDEIS for of Draft of Locally Preferred
•Preliminary HRT and City based oln Alternative(LPA)*
Ridership S
of Virginia
•Conceptual
Beach FTA Review HRTPO includes LPA
and
Engineering Review in Long Range
comment Transportation Plan
•Preliminary (LRTP)
Capital Costs
6
3
2/16/2010
Future Tasks
• Final EIS
• Preliminary Engineering
• New Starts Submittal process
• Refined Cost Estimates, Ridership, and
Financial Planning
7
Schedule and Next Steps
Winter 2011-Spring 2012 Summer-Fall Fall—Winter 2014
2014
Record of Decision
Submittal of Preliminary Engineering Complete
(PE)/New Starts Application to FTA: Initiation FEIS/PE Application to FTA to
of detailed FTA review
begin Final Design*
Draft Financial Plan Preparation of
Application to Commitment of Non-
Approval from FTA to enter PE phase of FTA for Final Federal funds required
project` Design
Negotiations begin with
Initiate PE Activities FTA for Full Funding
Final Environmental Impact Statement Grant Agreement
8
4
II
2/16/2010
Yom,
_,..---CiTeam an ees
Mgmt. Committee Technical Committee
• Jim Wood • Planning,
• John Uhrin Environmental,
• Jim Spore Traffic, Public Works,
• Mark Stiles Economic
• Steve Herbert Development,
• Planning, Economic Utilities
Development, SGA,
• Dominion Power
Media and
Communication • Corps of Engineers
• DEQ
• HRSD
• TPO
9
r--,ll-
1.1t5 �4fib.,-,� - V -IIIIIIIPIIIIIIIPII , art: . ::
6
• Completed ,*°
T
• Initial Project Kick Off-September
• Station Area Workshops-December I i
• Community Advisory Committee-October fi I
• Stakeholder Interviews-July '' :
• Still to Come .
• 3 Community Advisory Committee Mtgs
• Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) Public
Meeting `
• 2 SDEIS Public Hearings 4•
• City Council Updates .44,
• HDR Contractual -_ 'I
• HRT/City Staff on routine basis '?y # '*`' !i• i
.,
IIT H
l0
5
2/16/2010
-- -''` '
-------------
ationship With PlafiFsihg Efforts
• Comprehensive Plan
"Development of alternative(transportation) modes is a key component
to the future of transportation in Virginia Beach and Hampton Roads"
Action Item—"Incorporate public transit into the development of SGA
plans especially those that are on or near the east-west railway corridor."
• Strategic Growth Areas , -
P ,
• Resort Area(Dec 2008)
• Burton Station(Jan 2009) !•.
• Pembroke(Nov 2009)
• Newtown(Spring zoio)
_.
• On Corridor-To Be Completed
• Rosemont
- at
• Lynnhaven
• Hilltop
tu _.-----ng ------ ---- --
aonship With armiEfforts
Pembroke Oceanfront
.. — vib, • - ..•.„
1 7.71‘,14,.. ,r' '',.• • 1 . . • e,.: .t - ' • .
i
11 4: c''- : *..•.*.7..,''.v..,. -
i: b• i ' I g,* - in,.k
,.,.. ..,
• el' : ' , i:i 4 '
7-
1';3:
, 4
--...-:-
. , ..... .1. .-, •. 4'
:
.' "' :._ -..""
Newtown
4
r
.4 '
ti,
IA -• 111441.4'' :14
14 Pi ,:t * "*" . •,„..-^':';yree;
. ,--,'i . . . i -i_....-I I 1,041
,' 16 11 • 6'; ; • • •••• ii —
12
6
2/16/2010
• HDR Typical Section within •
ROW (Underground Drainage)
• Increased Cost not covered by , t;
New StartsL''
• Additional City Property/ROW
near corridor
• Preliminary Trail Design Spring N.
2012
,�,, I - ii 1 Itihip ' 11 ,
• ar k-' :c>-,�._
1 - __ . -_ 13
ical ROW Sec i w rail
0.01101.1111...
'r.ra gonwa rlMq
unm✓ttE SW w s ... r it ►t... ....
UP VOW
ra wn
I
i r
Iml J.I . — mine eMno�
1i1:i'
e • _-_>�T
n_ a 0
.1
crnwoExr ounr,waw
.utaVI LAS, mr.. PMENMSi
OW
.wovw WNW*
UR W.rrn'l
u•DESCe... 14
7
2/16/2010
Regional Interest and Support
"We don't have any real chance if we want to move people down that
corridor unless we look at rail."
Brad Face,president,Future of Hampton Roads,1996
"Light rail can significantly stimulate development. It's an economic
development tool as well as a transportation tool."
Consultant James L.Prost to Hampton Roads real estate
professionals,1998
6o%of Hampton Roads residents say poor transportation is"the principle
issue detracting from the area's quality of life."
Hampton Roads Partnership,2004
15
Regional Interest and Support
"It's a readiness issue for us."
Rear Admiral Mark S. Boensel, Commanding Officer, USN Region
Mid-Atlantic, Dec.16,2009
"Virginia Beach Vision remains a strong proponent for the inclusion of a
light rail system as an integral component of Hampton Roads'
transportation network and believes resources must be found to
continue the EIS uninterrupted."
Michael J. Barrett, President,Virginia Beach Vision,February 15,2010
"The money,while not insubstantial,is a small investment in a deeper
understanding of the transportation and development options the city
will face as it maps its future."
Virginian Pilot Editorial, February 15,2010.
16
8
2/16/2010
y-trot
• • .M
•
•
BRT LRT
• Phoenix • Boston
• Santa Clara • San Francisco
• Los Angeles • LA
• Hartford • Portland
• Miami • Philadelphia
• Honolulu • San Diego
• Chicago • Dallas
• Louisville • Denver
• Boston • St.Louis
• Charlotte • Sacramento
• Las Vegas • Salt Lake City
• Albany • Baltimore
• Cleveland • Phoenix
• Eugene • San Jose
• Pittsburgh • Minneapolis
• Houston
• Pittsburgh
• Charlotte
17
Natiid a Competition
2011 New Starts Funding
• Arizona • Michigan
• AZ,Tut son,Modern Streetcar • MI,Grand Rapids,Division Avenue BRT
• California • Minnesota
• CA,Oakland,Fast Bay BRT • MN.Sr.PauI-Minneapolis.Central Corridor LRT
• CA.Oakland,Oakland Airport Connector • New Jersey
• CA,Riverside.Perris Va lley Line • NJ.Northern New Jersey,Access to the Regions Core
• CA,Sacramento.South Corridor Phase a • New York
• U,San Bernardino,E Street Corridor abX BRT • NY.New York.Long Islami Rail Road Fast Side Access
• CA,San Francisco,Central Subway LRT • NY,New York,Nostnnd Avenue BRT
• CA.San Frariciuo.Van Neu Avenue BRT • NY.New York Second Avenue Subway Phase
• G.San Jose,Silicon Valley Berryessa Extension
• Colorado • North Carolina
• NC.Charlotte,Northeast Corridor Light Rail Project
• CO.Denver,fan Corridor LRT
• CO.Denver.Gold Lane • Oregon
• CO.Denver,Wen Corridor LRT • OR,Portland,Milwaukee LRT
• CO.FOR Collina,Mason Corridor BRT • Rhode Island
• CO.Roaring Fork Valley,BRT Project • RI,Providence,South County Commuter Rail
• Connecticut • Texas
• CT,Hartford.New Britain-Hartford Busway • TX.Austin,Metro Rapid BRT
• CT.Stamford,Urban Transit way Phase 11 • TX.Dallas.Northwest/Southeast LRT MOS
• Delaware • TX.Houston,North Corridor LRT
• DE.Wilmington.Wilmington to Newark Commuter Rail Improvements • TX,Houston,Southeast Corridor LRT
• Florida • TX.Houston,University Corridor LRT
• FL,Miami.Orange Line Phase,North Co r ridor Metrorail Extension • Utah
• FL,Orlando,Central Florida Commuter Rail Transit-Initial Operating • UT,Salt lake Ciry.Mid-Jordan LRT
Segment • UT,Salt take Ciry,Weber County to Salt Lake Ciry Commuter Rail
• Hawaii • UT,Salt Lake City,Draper LRT
• HI,Honolulu High Capacity Transit Corridor Project • Virginia
• Massachusetts • VA,Northern Virginia,Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project-Extension to Wiehle Ig
• MA.Bouon,Assembly Square Station • Washingtonsvaie.r. ..�•.••a ao„,a.a
• MA,Borten,Silver line Phase Ill • WA,Seattle,University Link ERE Eitension I nw Anw.swu new
• WA,King County.Wen Seattle BRT I$Yb....a.P.m
9
2/16/2010
. _ .,
Examples
i —el . ":,, 'ft ''' • '
.' •••. •:. 6.t •
• .
Ve
•• ."4-.00•••' . k.
&a s .1- * 6!. •'•• /:, •
b$Vs .1 ' 4 , - ."•••1.x.,t.,„k , ,
',6i • ' '''' . , t 14/, ; .
I ".' . • •... t
114b;‘
........ •— . , •. - • •••
. " ". 1 ^..;7:•-:'
• —..;—
:..... •••
.• ..." .
Portland Street Car Denver BRT
Phoenix LRT
Minnea olis LRT
. r• • / .,..-..r.:::.
s i ,
1 .27....::
S.- r'11''''' .- :71;\..1.•/'% ' 0*ing,:.. i 1 , , 1
,
,. .....,
7,17, .I.. IMAM.
' I-
a
-7 0
-...
..
1-
19
_ ..."".'..7
______ -------_-_-__----- – • . — 4 ••
.,.
"V.2'.,.... !..:.,..k....z.Tt.,... --.... ,...ta.,.. ...,„
.•„. ••.. k' I
....,•••••.el 1' , - i,'''' '
. 6...c . '''
_ -..f...1...I 1 I, p 6
..` . 4.,
' :II I
.i,.
:.,.
li Ili pc, - ......,, ;,
...._-- .
• ' II
-- ' ."......- .....
Salt Lake City LRT Houston LRT
Charlotte LRT
_— ..- -• --• •
Dallas LRT
•' -,711.. -...k. . .",.
7 ' i •
....( ..!-11-1-1 A .i •-• , *'17,, -;''."; ;
. . .
iL
....
....... ..„ ,.
;4 ,‘ k .s--:,- -.....---7••••.:::::::
. .
20
10
II
2/16/2010
• 9.6 Mile Starter '
Line-Nov 2007 k"-:
ol-
• Planning for ii mile l-- :_
extension started in ,
2000. Target ,.
opening 2016 , ' _. q _
• Expansions include ;r-�-:`
Commuter Rail, ;: ,:..;,J., . 0 ,-
Streetcar, LRT, and -' -i°'��
BRT - •\J ="` -=
21
�._ _ m . 4 •
IMIl
• 12 Miles-Opened June ' ...
2004 .-.I ,:. N
• Expanding stations to
accommodate 3-car
trains
•ii-mile Central
Corridor expansion T
may begin this year
• LRT expansion, BRT, - ,a
Express Bus, and .•,,, „ • t
Commuter Rail ,
planned "
AN. 22
11
2/16/2010
•
•
• I -7-
..
111
•
1,04
. •••••
• .tr
. ;
**." • 'I • •
•
41114--••,
glio
010
-..
Awbow.os.s.4,
23•
• •
a A 0
. •
24
12
1 II
2/16/2010
" :"""w`"""""`"'i'"r"'' March 9 Items
• Y • Roadway Guide Signs Amendment
--. • R-5R Swimming Pools Amendment
• Cape Henry Station(Use Permit)
*ow.
,:f"
Evaluation and
Recommendation
City of Va Beach • Planning Staff recommended approval
AnOrdinance a,o,ds.ouo,.111,2++.«drata • Planning Commission recommends
the Gly Zoning ord nanCs and to add a anw Mellon
211.1,*fining the tem"Rued.w•Golds%lie4Ml approval (10-0)
i abwhiaa regdnrrcnta for etlawWq etch Gln
too public orey • There was no opposition.
• Consent agenda
Evaluation and
Recommendation
City of Va Beach • Planning Staff recommended approval
M*drones wamend the City Zoning Ordrelno.krr • Planning Commission recommends
reducing whack requirements for -ground
• approval(7-3)
b..otus of the Atlantic ocean in tha
R-6R Residential District.
1
2/16/2010
^7 . ca,e Henn•Station�.,ILEX' • f 'I". � •;Z- .s`
aa. ,e' Ill /i p U'
it
\ A36 -\74-; Nao...7111001 _ .
ill
lag
o•^ •
t YNNHAVEN DISTRICT
Relevant Information
• The applicant requests a Conditional Use
Permit to allow the installation of a roof-
mounted wind energy conversion system
(wind turbine).
• Electricity generated from the system will
be used on the site.Excess will be sold to
Virginia Power.
• Proposed turbine meets the standards .
provided in the Zoning Ordinance for this
use. \
,404:.1:7417*-'"
,- ° _ Evaluation and
` " Va .41'.4' Recommendation
• Planning Staff recommended approval
i • Planning Commission recommends
approval(10-0)
.. -II . .� I-f Mil ollro • There was no opposition.
ra' � ,, •
�ti; . • Consent agenda
2
II
2/16/2010
March 23 Items
z3,!!.
Robert Ramsa
• Robert Ramsey(Use Permit)
Mr/
AG+ _I AG2 aki
_`
AG1 rS .�
i
7 AOI �' ;1,/
PRINCESS ANNE DISTRICT
10 Relevant Information
• The applicant requests a Conditional Use
Permit for firewood preparation.
• Planning Commission deferred the
application for two months to allow the
i aftelleliailap- +----- .. applicant to'clean up'the site.
``Q��' • Logs for the firewood are brought to the
_._ site from the applicant's tree removal
44:--0% service jobs.
..
`..... • • The splitting of logs occurs behind a
detached garage on the site.
r
Site prior to'clean upSIte YRar dean 4 14€{,E
is'
q..
q
• l ' '7-&:•
4.�
jukiisr
1
3
2/16/2010
Evaluation and
Recommendation
• Planning Staff recommended approval
with conditions and a one-year time limit
• Planning Commission recommends
denial(10-0)
• There was no opposition.
4
1
VIRGINIA BEACH CITY COUNCIL
February 16, 2010
5 : 00 p .m.
WORKSHOP SESSION
CITY MANAGER ' S BRIEFING
ELECTRONIC DISPLAY (LED) SIGN REGULATIONS
VERBATIM
CITY COUNCIL
William D. Sessoms , Jr . , Mayor At-Large
Louis R. Jones, Vice-Mayor Bayside - District 4
William R. DeSteph At-Large
Harry E . Diezel Kempsville - District 2
Robert M. Dyer Centerville - District 1
Barbara M. Henley Princess Anne - District 7
Glenn R. Davis Rose Hall - District 3
John E . Uhrin Beach - District 6
(Vacant) At-Large
Rosemary Wilson At-Large
James L. Wood Lynnhaven - District 5
CITY MANAGER: James K. Spore
CITY ATTORNEY: Mark D. Stiles
CITY ASSESSOR: Jerald Banagan
CITY AUDITOR: Lyndon S . Remias
CITY CLERK: Ruth Hodges Fraser, MMC
SARAH DEAL JENKINS, CMC
DEPUTY CITY CLERK, II
2
MAYOR SESSOMS: Mr . Spore?
CITY MANAGER: Last week, we talked about the LED
Sign Regulations in the Planning
Commission and the staff and Ron Villanueva when he was on
Council worked very hard with the City Attorney' s office and
the Planning staff to put together some regulations to cover
the new technology of the LED signs .
Last week when we talked about that, Council said we need some
time to be able to think about this and talk about it together
in a workshop environment and asked us to schedule that . So,
we asked Bill and Jack and Stephen and Karen to put together
just an overview presentation to show some examples , in terms
of what are the two ordinances that are on your plate right
now, how did we get here, and what are the regulations that
are proposed.
Bill , are you doing this, or Jack? Are you going to kick it
off?
JACK WHITNEY: I ' ll kick it off . The heavy lifting
will be done by Mr . Macali . This one
is a very illuminating briefing. One of your favorite
subjects , what you ' re about to hear, we ' ve been at this about
a year now, since Mr . Villanueva initiated a process which led
to a Draft Ordinance regulating what up until now has not been
regulated in our community; that, being, LED-type signs .
What you ' re getting ready to hear is a description of the
ordinance, called Referred Ordinance, commonly known as the
Villanueva Ordinance, which you referred to the Planning
Commission. They, in turn, appointed a subcommittee, went
through a number of workshops and hearings , and developed what
you will see next to the Referred Ordinance as the Alternate
Ordinance, which contains many of the same features but some
that are different . You will also see a comparison of where
those differences are .
You will then see some options that you may wish to consider
that aren ' t really contained or addressed in either of those
two ordinances in order to move forward. You ' re going to also
see some really impressive and interesting imagery, videos,
and static photographs , which I think really are illustrative
of what is going on in the sign community today. And Bill
Macali and Stephen and Karen and Kevin Hershberger have worked
very hard over the past year, working with the industry, with
the community, with the Planning Comission, and with you to
get us where we are today. So, with that, let me ask Bill to
take it over .
3
br
WILLIAM MACALI : I ' d just like to start off with a
little bit of history to refresh the
recollection of those who participated in that history and
maybe bring the newer Members of Council up to date on what ' s
been happening.
Virginia Beach has been a leader in sign regulation for some
time, at least in Virginia. Prior to 1986 , we didn ' t have
much of a sign ordinance . There were a lot of signs all
around. They were high. They were big. They were kind of
ugly. In 1986 , we adopted what is an ordinance that is pretty
much like our current ordinance. We limited the size of
signs, the number of them, the height of them. We did some
other things, like controlling nonconforming signs better than
we had.
The year after that, probably it ' s hard to forget this if you
were involved in this effort, we prohibited new billboards in
Virginia Beach. There were sixty-some at that time,
approximately, I guess . Not one single other new billboard
has been built since then. We adopted some very strict
regulations governing existing nonconforming billboards . The
result has been there ' s only about thirty or thirty-five or
something like that now.
About that same time, we were involved in the Atlantic Avenue
Improvement Project, which included among other things the
undergrounding of the utilities, elimination of signs
overhanging the right-of-way, and, if we could, I ' d like to
just turn the lights for a second and just show you what ' s
been the result?
MAYOR SESSOMS: Help yourself .
WILLIAM MACALI : That ' s what it was before 1987 .
That ' s approximately what it is now.
That is taken from the corner of Great Neck Road, the
northwest corner of Great Neck looking west . If you could see
that "Lawn Mower, Exterminators, Aldridge Chambers" sign, must
be thirty (30) feet high, "Mercury-Lincoln" sign, you can' t
see a single one of those signs, really, when you ' re driving
down the street because they' re all shouting . And what
happened was Virginia Beach Boulevard was widened, the
nonconforming sign regulations kicked in, and this is what it
looks like looking the opposite direction.
So, Virginia Beach does have a pretty proud history of sign
regulation. And our sign regulation has served us well since
it was adopted, but right now there ' s a need for an update,
4
basically because of new technologies . Our ordinance was
developed before the new technologies were invented, and like
a lot of things involving law and technology, technology comes
faster and the law has to catch up .
Unlike this sign, you can see the message board there which
has to be changed by hand, now you can do it just quickly and
remotely with a computer and a connection to the sign. This
is a picture of a sign that is a pretty nice looking one that
uses the old technology, nothing electronic about that , but
that ' s not the case with all of them. For a number of
reasons, LED and other Electronic Display Technologies, LED is
what probably if your TV is not a Plasma it ' s probably an LED
TV, we call them Electronic Display Signs because there ' s a
lot of different technologies, and the key is that they' re
capable of being changed remotely. The reason that they ' re
popular is, one, because you can show a whole lot more
information with those kinds of signs , and, two, as technology
is wont to do, price starts out high, comes down low, and
everybody adopts it .
So, now there ' s a need to update the ordinance to address the
new technologies . So, what happened was in August you
referred to the Planning Commission Amendments to regulate
these types of signs , and that ' s what, as Jack said, we call
the Referred Version. In September through November, the
Planning Commission held some public workshops and meetings on
the amendments and concluded that a more restrictive approach
was needed. And so, the Planning Commission recommended an
Alternative Ordinance, which is considerably, although not in
every single respect, but on balance considerably more
restrictive than the ordinance which was referred to the City
Council .
So, now I ' ll just take you through the comparison. Both
ordinances , they have to be a monument sign. You can ' t have a
sign on top of a pole . We ' re developing, we have in this
ordinance, regulations as to what constitutes a monument sign;
it ' s a sign with a base that ' s roughly the same size as the
sign face, and without getting into that too much, it ' s a
much, much, nicer looking sign, in general . Under both
ordinances , LED signs have to be monument style, and there ' s
an eight (8 ) foot maximum, as opposed to twelve (12 ) foot
maximum for our other free-standing signs . Monument signs
are, by definition, free-standing signs, so all of these
signs, with one exception I ' ll get to, have to be not only
free standing but monument signs and no higher than eight (8 )
feet high.
Under the original version, there was a thirty-two (32 ) square
5
foot maximum size . That was because a lot of our signage, the
free-standing signage, the maximum size per face is thirty-two
(32 ) square feet .
MAYOR SESSOMS : Excuse me . I 'm sorry. Rosemary had
a quick question.
COUNCIL LADY WILSON: With these monument signs no higher
than eight ( 8 ) feet, does that mean
for all new signs , or does that mean if you 've got an existing
sign?
WILLIAM MACALI : They all have a vested right to
remain.
COUNCIL LADY WILSON: But they can change?
WILLIAM MACALI : They can.
COUNCIL LADY WILSON: They can change into an LED sign?
WILLIAM MACALI : Well, no . We ' ll get to that . The
bottom line is, if you make the
structural alterations necessary for an LED sign to replace
your other sign, our Code says, one of the ordinances we
passed back in 1986 , that it has to conform to current
regulations . So, you can ' t just slap on an LED sign face on a
twenty (20) foot high sign or something like that . But any
existing LED signs have a vested right to continue until
they' re replaced, moved, structurally altered, enlarged, but
if they stay the same --
COUNCIL LADY WILSON: So, if it ' s a twelve (12 ) foot sign
and it ' s stationary, by hand you put
in all of the letters or whatever, you can ' t change it to an
LED sign?
CITY ATTORNEY: Without making it conform. You have
to make it conform to these
regulations . If you changed it that way, yes .
WILLIAM MACALI : Right . In any event, thirty-two (32 )
square foot maximum is in the
Original Ordinance . Under the Planning Commission ' s
Alternative Ordinance, thirty-two (32 ) square feet is the same
maximum, but under no circumstances can the LED portion of a
sign exceed fifty (50) percent of the total sign face . So, if
you have a sign that ' s thirty-two (32 ) square feet, part of it
is like the identification of a business in non-LED, the
other, the maximum LED portion can only be sixteen (16) square
6
feet because that ' s fifty (50) percent . It ' s thirty-two (32 )
square feet or fifty ( 50) percent of the total sign area,
whichever is less . In each case, you can only have one (1 )
per lot . That ' s no different , because now you can only really
have one (1 ) free-standing sign per lot .
One difference in which the Original Ordinance is probably
more restrictive for a reason is that you could not have an
LED sign within a hundred fifty ( 150) feet of any Residential
or Apartment District . Under the Planning Commission ' s
Alternative Ordinance, because of what I 'm going to talk about
in the next slide, which is what kind of displays are allowed,
there is no need to regulate the not letting one be within a
hundred fifty ( 150) feet of a neighborhood. The reason is
because under the old ordinance you could have a lot more on
the sign, a lot more visuals, changing more rapidly. It was a
lot more intrusive visually. Under the proposed Planning
Commission version, that ' s not the case, and there ' s really no
real reason to regulate, to prohibit them within a hundred
fifty (150) feet of a Residential or Apartment District .
Now, the Zoning Districts allowed are the same, and most
Business Districts , not all, B-1 , which is the neighborhood
business, LED signs aren ' t allowed, and in the B-4K, which is
the Historic Kempsville District , we felt that the historic
nature of the district would preclude having a brand new type
of technology. That ' s the same in any Zoning District .
Schools and Public uses in any Zoning District are allowed to
have an LED sign under our new ordinance; again, subject to
eight (8 ) feet high, thirty-two (32 ) square feet, etcetera .
In Town Center and in the B-4C, you can have either a
free-standing sign with the approval of City Council or one
(1) sign on the building as opposed to a free-standing LED
sign; that ' s the one exception to the monument sign rule .
In the Town Center and B-4C, it ' s more of an urban area and
it ' s a little bit more appropriate to allow a sign to be an
LED sign on the building . If you put it on the building, you
can ' t have a free-standing sign. In any event, you would need
the approval of City Council for other kinds of sign. Public
Parks can have an LED sign, again, with Council approval . We
didn ' t feel like it would be appropriate just to allow them By
Right . Council approval for Public Parks is something we
thought was appropriate . In both, really, Religious Uses can
have signs with a Conditional Use Permit in Residential and
Apartment Districts . The language of the Original Version is
Assembly Uses . Assembly Uses includes Religious Uses , but it
really doesn ' t matter . The bottom line is Religious Uses can
have such signs in a Residential or Apartment District with a
Use Permit; that ' s just consistent with the way the current
7
Code reads anyway, so that ' s nothing new.
The other aspect in which the Planning Comission ' s version may
be less restrictive is that the Original Ordinance did not
allow any LED signs in the RT-1 . The new one, the Planning
Commission version, allows them in conjunction with hotel in
the RT-1 District , and that ' s because the display will be a
lot less visually striking, intrusive, etcetera . It really
isn ' t likely to be too terribly out of place there . In
neither area can you have an LED sign which literally is
modern in a Historic Cultural District where the purpose is
something really different . Of course, there ' s always the
possibility that a particular use could ask to be rezoned out
of the Historic District . If it remains in a Historic
District, no, you can' t have an LED sign.
This is , probably, these are the major differences . Under the
old ordinance -- I shouldn' t say "old" -- under the Original
Ordinance, full color is allowed, graphics , in other words ,
symbols, logos, we ' ll show you some of those, but no video, no
full motion. Whereas, the Alternative Ordinance allows just
one color without any background illumination, no pictures , no
graphics , nothing but text . So, you will have a black
background with one (1) color of text; that ' s all you can
have . That ' s the big difference . Neither one can advertise
goods or services not located on the lot . That would really
make them a billboard and that ' s totally out .
The other big difference is under the Referred Ordinance the
display can change every five (5 ) seconds . Under the Planning
Commission ' s Alternative Ordinance, it cannot change more
often than every minute, and the change has to be
instantaneous . It can ' t blink out slowly or part of it blink
out and part of it come on. It all has to be instantaneous,
message off, message on, and only text . One exemption,
video/audio not allowed in either, that ' s pretty obvious .
Brightness, that ' s the same . Sunrise to sunset, five thousand
( 5 , 000) candelas per square meter at the sign face, sunset to
sunrise, five hundred (500) candelas per square meter .
Candelas is a pretty difficult thing to talk about , but
basically those are pretty much the lowest luminous brightness
measures that we found in other ordinances, so that shouldn ' t
be any kind of an issue . Both ordinances require automatic
dimming, the capability to automatically dim based on ambient
light levels . And both have exemptions for time and
temperature, which displays just time and temperature, I
guess , every five (5 ) seconds . Another is gasoline prices,
which just show the gas prices are not considered LED signs,
and we ' ll show you an example of that . Right there, all of
8
those four things, they' re not LED signs or anything like
that . They can stay as long as they stay continuously. Only
the gas price is advertised. Keep in mind that that is a
non-conforming sign, because, I don ' t know, is that twelve
( 12 ) feet, or is that higher than twelve (12 ) feet?
KEVIN HERSHBERGER: Fifteen (15 ) .
WILLIAM MACALI : Twelve ( 12 ) feet is the maximum for
any free-standing sign, other than an
LED sign, so any new sign would be lower and smaller than that
and would have some landscaping around it . But that is
something which we really didn ' t feel that appropriate to call
that four (4) different LED signs or anything like that .
So, let ' s give some examples . The flickering, that ' s just an
artifact of taking a picture of a picture, but this is in real
time . These are how fast they change . Again, these are in
real time, so the messages are changing pretty quickly. Then
the next one, neither of these, by the way, would be permitted
under the Planning Commission version. As a matter of fact,
this one is probably a little bit too big, but the basic
message under the Referred Version would be all right . Under
the other one, it wouldn ' t be because there ' s a lot of motion
in there . But if they got rid of the motion, that probably
would have been permitted, in terms of what the display looked
like, not the size or anything like that . This is one up at
Lynnhaven Parkway and Princess Anne Road. This wouldn ' t be
permitted under either version, the display, because of the
motion involved.
I think it ' s evident that the purpose of these displays is to
attract attention of people driving by, and there ' s really no
getting around that . I don ' t see how anybody can claim
otherwise . Nice picture of somebody laying some cash on you .
COUNCIL LADY WILSON: That just doesn ' t fit .
WILLIAM MACALI : That ' s time and temperature . That ' s
okay.
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: This jewelry store sells everything,
don ' t they?
COUNCIL LADY WILSON: You had to stop the car and just sit
and wait .
COUNCILMAN DYER: It reminds me of the old drive-in
movies .
9
WILLIAM MACALI : Well, that ' s essentially what one of
the reasons for this ordinance is .
MAYOR SESSOMS : There ' s Jim Spore ' s favorite .
WILLIAM MACALI : This is another one . That does not
flash on and off . That really is,
again, an artifact of taking a picture of a picture . It ' s all
steady display there .
MAYOR SESSOMS: Barbara?
COUNCIL LADY HENLEY: That sign is much too high.
WILLIAM MACALI : Yes .
COUNCIL LADY HENLEY: So, that ' s a nonconforming sign.
WILLIAM MACALI : Absolutely.
COUNCIL LADY HENLEY: Well, how were they able to make any
change in a nonconforming sign
without conforming?
WILLIAM MACALI : They won ' t be able to .
COUNCIL LADY HENLEY: But they didn ' t do that .
WILLIAM MACALI : But the reason is that we have no
regulations pertaining to the LED
aspects or the electronic aspects for signs . So long as they
meet the requirements of the Sign Ordinance in effect when the
sign went up --
KAREN LASLEY: That one is twelve ( 12 ) feet . It
conforms to today ' s regulations .
WILLIAM MACALI : -- okay. So, that ' s twelve (12 )
feet . But see, that ' s the thing, we
had an ordinance for twenty-three (23 ) years that covered it
until this new technology came . There ' s nothing in the
ordinance which prohibits LED signs, and that ' s why the staff
and Mr . Villanueva agreed that something needed to be done .
Now, this said one color of moving graphics . It is one color
if you look at the computer, but the projector kind of changes
colors a little bit and it makes it look red and amber, but
it ' s really pretty much orange and amber, different shades of
it . Now, that sign is too high and too large, but the LED
portion is what would be, if all else, conforming, one color,
10
text only, on a dark background.
Now, this issue, multi-tenant shopping centers is an issue.
Right now, a shopping center with more than five (5 ) tenants
and greater than approximately one ( 1) acre can have these
tenant identification signs as part of their free-standing
sign. Typically, these signs can be larger than the maximum
free-standing signs in other types of free-standing signs and
they can display tenants . That was something that was done, I
think, pretty much in connection when we passed the Retail
Design Guidelines .
That is kind of a special problem, because that sign is pretty
busy as it is , and what happens if someone wants to put an LED
sign in addition to that? They could do that under either
ordinance, but we are going to present some options that City
Council may want to consider . If that ' s not a problem, then
so be it . But one of the options is for these signs you can ' t
have an electronic display. That ' s not so bad, because an
electronic display sign can only be thirty-two (32 ) square
feet maximum, the electronic section of it, if the sign is
even big enough for that, and they could be considerably
larger than that if they don' t have any LED elements .
So, we don' t think that would be too awful to say that you
can ' t have electronic display signs for tenant signs in these
shopping centers, but that ' s up to Council . We do recommend
that existing signs which are converted into electronic
display signs have to meet all landscaping requirements . They
already do have to meet all requirements of the Electronic
Display Sign Ordinance . We just put that in there, but the
landscaping requirements are considerably better than they
used to be . So, instead of grass, you have to have shrubbery,
things like that .
Another option City Council may want to consider is to either
reduce or increase the dwell time; the dwell time, being the
amount of time that a message has to stay on the board. On
the Original Version, five (5 ) seconds, under the Planning
Commission ' s Version, one ( 1) minute . There ' s no magic to
that . One (1 ) minute, I know what you ' re all thinking; you ' re
all thinking whether there ' s been any studies on this . There
really haven ' t been a whole lot of studies on LED signs .
They' re generally on billboards . To the extent there have
been, there ' s nothing authoritative. You can' t point to one
study and say this blows away all the others .
In any event, while five ( 5) seconds may be unduly distracting
to drivers , one ( 1 ) minute, there ' s not going to be a study
which says that an LED sign that has a dwell time of one ( 1)
11
minute or more is unduly distracting. Sure, signs do distract
drivers, and that ' s their nature . The signs are up there to
say "Here ' s where Joe ' s Barber is . Here ' s where Walgreen' s
is" ; but one (1) minute is considerably less distracting, of
course, than five (5 ) seconds .
And if Council wants, one of the things you can consider is
reduce or increase the Zoning Districts in which these are
allowed. One candidate is possibly Industrial Districts .
Under the Planning Commission ' s Version, the signage of such,
you know, the plain old text on a dark background and the size
and all and the fact that these can ' t change more in one (1)
minute isn ' t going to mess up Industrial Districts, but,
again, that is entirely up to City Council .
The last option is, you really don ' t have to allow these at
all, but if you do say no LED signs we think you have to
include public electronic display signs, as well as private
signs . The second issue is, you have to re-refer this issue
back to the Planning Commission, which couldn ' t, absent of
having a special meeting, couldn ' t hear the matter until
April . We already have gone past the March deadline, so there
would be some people out there who would be filing
applications . In the meantime, we really don ' t have an
ordinance which covers the LED aspects .
So, anyway, again, about the option of not doing them at all ,
again, that is something you can do . But to allow the public
signs to be there because they are somehow different
qualitatively or quantitatively, or nicer or something than
private signs, is just not going to hold water in Court .
MAYOR SESSOMS : Bill, we 've got some questions for
you. Starting with Bill?
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: I 've got some quick ones, Bill . Is
there a State Law Statute on this at
all?
WILLIAM MACALI : Not that applies to us . We have
control of our own roadways .
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: So, we ' re consistent with State Law?
WILLIAM MACALI : Right . State Law has never attempted
to -- VDOT has never attempted to
interfere with our sign regulations .
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Has there been or is there any
increase in the number of accidents
12
on, like, Virginia Beach Boulevard in front of Thalia Baptist
Church where they have theirs?
WILLIAM MACALI : I have no idea, absolutely no idea .
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: I think it would be, I mean, it ' s
been there long enough, we should be
able to look at a sixty (60) day or ninety (90) day snapshot
and say, "Hey, ninety (90) days this year, here ' s how many
accidents . Ninety (90) days last year, here ' s how many
accidents" .
STEPHEN WHITE: We were asked that question during
the Planning Commission process,
contacted the Police Department and the answer is no.
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: No increase?
COUNCILMAN DAVIS : I 've got a study from Rosemont Road.
WILLIAM MACALI : But keep in mind, the studies that
have been done look at a whole lot
more than one location, one sign for sixty ( 60) or ninety (90)
days . They' re way, way, more involved than that, and I just
don' t think you can draw any kind of conclusions from a
statistical sample as extremely narrow as that . But the
answer is, no, there have been none .
MAYOR SESSOMS: Barbara?
COUNCIL LADY HENLEY: On the signs for Schools, who ' s
paying for those?
WILLIAM MACALI : Schools, I guess .
COUNCIL LADY HENLEY: These are pretty expensive signs . I
can see every school having to have
one .
WILLIAM MACALI : Well, a lot of them want them, I
wouldn ' t doubt it, but I don ' t know
who pays for them. I guess , sometimes the PTA ' s do it,
sometimes the football boosters, but I just don' t know how
many are paid for by the Schools budget, how many are paid by
private contributions . We just don' t know that .
COUNCILMAN WOOD: To answer that, I know the sign,
itself, at PA was paid for by the
Class of ' 75 and then refurbished by the Class of ' 88 , because
they've got a little tag under there . I don ' t know who paid
13
for the LED portion of it , but I remember that was a gift at
one of the reunions .
MAYOR SESSOMS: Louis?
VICE-MAYOR JONES : Two questions . Bill, do you know are
there any other shopping centers that
currently have these Electronic Display Signs for the tenants?
WILLIAM MACALI : Kevin Hershberger, who is a sign
inspector who does all of these, says
no, and you can take that to the bank.
VICE-MAYOR JONES : And go over, again, the point about
the hundred fifty (150 ) foot from
Residential?
WILLIAM MACALI : Right . Under the Planning
Commission ' s Version, there was
something that said you cannot have an LED sign within a
hundred fifty ( 150) feet of any Residential or Apartment
District .
KAREN LASLEY: That was the Original Version.
WILLIAM MACALI : I 'm sorry. I said Planning. That
was the Original Version. I 'm sorry.
The reason that was in there, you saw the signs, like the Pawn
Shop sign, that would be pretty darn distracting. However, if
you just have, as in the Planning Commission Version, a black
background with one color text only that changes only once a
minute, that ' s not nearly as visually intrusive as the other
kind of signs . And so, really, it was thought that probably
on balance there was no real need to have that distance
limitation, that an LED sign with just text, small, sixteen
( 16 ) square feet is the maximum, is the typical size, and only
going on and off once per minute is a lot less intrusive than
the other kind of signs . So, on balance, there was really no
need for that, because that would eliminate a lot of potential
LED signs .
VICE-MAYOR JONES : And in the Original Version, churches
could have the signs?
WILLIAM MACALI : With a Conditional Use Permit under
either version.
VICE-MAYOR JONES : Under either version?
WILLIAM MACALI : Yes . That ' s because we already have
14
a Code Section which says the signage
of Churches and Residential Districts can be determined by
Conditional Use Permit; that ' s essentially why the City
Council heard the Wave Church Application several months ago .
But in either case under both ordinances, a Use Permit is
necessary for a church or any religious use in a Residential
or Apartment District, yes , Sir .
VICE-MAYOR JONES : So, a sign could be, what, ten ( 10 )
foot off a property line next to a
residence?
WILLIAM MACALI : In a church, the City Council really
gets to decide that .
VICE-MAYOR JONES : I 'm not referring to a church. I 'm
just referring to any sign. A sign
could be ten (10) foot off the property line next to a
residential home?
WILLIAM MACALI : If it ' s Zoned B-1 , B-2 , B-3 , there
probably isn ' t a whole lot of
opportunity for that, but if that situation exists the answer
is, yes, it could, potentially, yes, Sir .
MAYOR SESSOMS : Rosemary?
COUNCIL LADY WILSON: The problem is not as much what ' s
here today, because there ' s not that
many, but ten ( 10) years from now when everybody has converted
their signs, you ' re going to go down the road and everything
is going to be moving and blinking and changing, and all the
hard work that ' s been done to clean up the landscape --
WILLIAM MACALI : Unless you pass a version that
doesn ' t allow the moving and
blinking .
COUNCIL LADY WILSON: Right , exactly. Has any thought been
given to only kind of getting away
from the advertising to more of public service announcements,
that sort of thing, just to only allow maybe non-profits,
churches , schools, and they have to have a Conditional Use
Permit? I mean, we don ' t want to be riding down the road and
seeing that Coke is $1 . 99 , then hoses are $3 . 00 .
WILLIAM MACALI : That ' s going to be a difficult issue .
To say that LED signs are okay for
certain uses and not for others because of the message is
probably what would amount to a content-based restriction,
15
which are disfavored strongly by the Courts . So, I think the
answer to that is, no, we didn ' t consider it because it would
be difficult to sustain, legally. At the same time, we do
have an ordinance which says "any non-commercial copy can be
displayed in lieu of a commercial copy" ; that ' s to get away
from any other kind of Constitutional issues . But when you
say you can only have non-profits, places like that, with
these signs , that would be difficult to defend, I think, very
difficult .
COUNCIL LADY WILSON: You could do commercial and
non-commercial definitions .
CITY ATTORNEY: Any time you get into a content-based
analysis, any time you ' re talking
about what is shown on the sign versus where the sign can be
located, the size of the sign, the nature of the display,
things of that nature, to get into an analysis that takes you
down the road makes it much more difficult to sustain the
regulation.
COUNCIL LADY WILSON: So, according to what Bill was
saying, commercial versus
non-commercial, can you make a distinction there?
WILLIAM MACALI : Yes, because --
CITY ATTORNEY: Go ahead.
WILLIAM MACALI : When we adopted our Original Sign
Ordinance, and we did the Billboards ,
too, there were many cases out there, and there still are,
saying you cannot treat commercial signs better than
non-commercial signs . So, we said if you have the right to a
commercial sign then you can display a non-commercial message,
if you want, but that ' s at the option of the property owner;
whereas, your question is at our option. We can ' t make them
limit the displays to non-commercial messages because of the
content-based restriction line of cases, and I think Mark is
understating the case. It is really very difficult . It ' s a
road we really don ' t want to go down, to say that only
non-profits and non-commercial messages can be out there .
MAYOR SESSOMS : I don ' t want to cut you off .
COUNCIL LADY WILSON: Well, I mean, was there just any
thought of just making anyone that
wants an LED sign, make them all come for a Conditional Use
Permit?
16
WILLIAM MACALI : No, ma ' am, because there would be
dozens of these . I don' t know how
many. Karen has the --
KAREN LASLEY: We estimate at least ten (10) max,
ten (10) to twenty (20 ) ; you ' d have
ten (10) to twenty (20) a month.
WILLIAM MACALI : And you still need to have standards
for granting a Use Permit or not
granting a Use Permit, because if there aren ' t any standards
it ' s really kind of hit or miss, and you ' re open to all sorts
of things, like disparate treatment, things like that . So, it
really would not help the situation to make them all be
allowable only by Conditional Use Permit . We do an awful lot
of things by By-Right development, and the idea is if you have
the right regulations it should be okay if somebody can do
something, as a matter of right, rather than having to go to
City Council .
We ' re trying to get this right, and, of course, City Council ' s
suggestions are obviously more than welcome, but having a Use
Permit process would just slow down people ' s ability to get
these . Use Permits cost $800 . It would not really be good
for the small businessman. To reduce the fee for Conditional
Use Permits would actually cost the City money; $800 is about
the least it costs for the City to process Use Permits . There
have to be four (4) advertisements in the newspaper, for one
thing, and then staff time, things like that, letters to
adjacent property owners . We did think about it , but we
really don ' t recommend that version, Mrs . Wilson.
COUNCIL LADY WILSON: If I could ask one more question?
MAYOR SESSOMS: Sure.
COUNCIL LADY WILSON: The signs that are currently in place
that have lots of activity, if we
pass this where you could only have dark background, one
color, all those restrictions, the signs that are already in
place, would they have to conform to the new regulations?
WILLIAM MACALI : No, ma ' am.
COUNCIL LADY WILSON: So, they ' re grandfathered in to the
time they put theirs up?
WILLIAM MACALI : Right . Grandfathering isn ' t the
exact -- grandfathering is when an
ordinance specifically says they can say. If you don ' t say
17
anything, then it ' s a vested right, and it ' s really the same
thing.
COUNCIL LADY WILSON: Right .
WILLIAM MACALI : We really can ' t make them.
COUNCIL LADY WILSON: We can ' t make them change .
WILLIAM MACALI : Right , unfortunately, unless the
State Law were to change . At one
point, we tried to do that years and years ago and just got
nowhere and don ' t expect we 'd be able to get anywhere now.
MAYOR SESSOMS: Bob?
COUNCILMAN DYER: Thank you. I think what we have here
is a big dilemma. You have the folks
on the Beautification Commission, advocates like Rosemary,
Reba, who have lobbied for, and Barbara, decades to make sure
the city is beautiful and everything . But here we have a new
technology that we really don ' t quite know how to deal with.
The opposite side of the dilemma is the business community,
and do we have an obligation to at least find a method that
they have a right to go out there and advertise that their
businesses are there .
Now, Jack, remember that Town Hall Meeting we had at Woods
Corner, where we got the people and the shop owners together?
JACK WHITNEY: I do .
COUNCILMAN DYER: And one of the complaints was a lot
of the strip malls and stuff, folks
don ' t, you know, passersby don ' t know what businesses are in
there, and that was an identified problem they had. I know I
have one lady who has a consignment shop at University Shops
right across from CBN, and the angle that she is at nobody can
see where she is from Indian River Road. So, the point is ,
how do we properly identify that these businesses are existing
in these strip malls? I know there ' s quite a few places like
the shops at Rose Hall and a few other places that businesses
can ' t be properly identified so people know they ' re there .
So, I think that as we move forward here, we have to take into
consideration some of the needs of the small business
community that allow them to properly identify what they ' re
doing and let people know they ' re there . We have to give them
a fair shake, because I 'm sure we all agree that over the next
couple of years we ' re going to need the small business
18
community to thrive and prosper.
MAYOR SESSOMS : Glenn?
COUNCILMAN DAVIS : Mr . Mayor, I think Bob is exactly
right . We 've got a couple different
sides to this equation. There ' s a third part . You have the
business, you have the Beautification Committee, and you have
the community leaders . I just talked to Chandler Scarborough
on my way over, and he wants to make sure that whatever we do
here does not prevent them from putting up the new beautiful
Green Run signs that they are getting ready to send in with an
LED on the back side so people can know when their meetings
are, when their events are in their communities .
You know, I saw the most gorgeous LED sign I think I 've ever
seen, including the ones in Vegas, today at Town Center . If
you hated those, you ' re probably going to hate that one, but I
thought it was wonderful . The thing is , it was perfectly
placed in an area that it was reasonable to have it .
Obviously, it doesn' t fit in Pungo . It doesn ' t fit in
Kempsville . It may fit on the Oceanfront, but not very many
other places . And so, I 'm concerned that although staff has
done a tremendous job, and Planning, putting together two (2 )
ordinances in front of us , like I said last time, it ' s not
very often that Rosemary and I don ' t agree .
But it ' s kind of funny that there ' s typically two sides to the
equation, and right now neither one of us are happy with what
we have in front of us . I think it ' s because we might be
trying to put a round peg in a square hole and say we know
Kempsville is not Pungo . We know Town Center is not Green
Run. Is there a way to draft something that allows us to find
the middle of the road? And I really think as much work
that ' s in what ' s facing us right now, if it ' s feasible for us
to take even just a week, maybe take two weeks, but maybe just
a week, and have a small subcommittee, a group of us that may
be interested that can get together that are on, I guess , more
the diverse ends of the spectrum, can get together and say
what are the important issues here that we ' re trying to
protect and what is important that we allow these signs still
to do and come up with some of the points that we can then
turn to staff and see if they can draft into a
middle-of-the-road solution here .
I still like Rosemary ' s idea of a Conditional Use Permit . I
understand we have to have some set of restrictions going in,
or else it looks almost like an arbitrary decision, but I
think if we can just put a group of us around the table that
really are kind of passionate about this issue, we can
19
probably nail something down that I think makes just about all
of us happy.
MAYOR SESSOMS : Great . Jim? You ' re done? Barbara?
COUNCIL LADY HENLEY: Well, just to comment on what Bob had
to say before I have my question, you
said these businesses need a sign to let people know that
they' re there . Well , that ' s one thing; that ' s a location.
But what you ' re taking it to is another level, to be able to
advertise the product, and that ' s what I think is the stickler
here, that we ' re increasing the purpose of the sign with this .
Just how far are we going to go?
I go back to this distraction, and this article that was in
the newspaper a couple of weeks ago, front page, this is one
of the best places to have a crash, and the second highest
reason for crashes was distracted drivers . Now, if all of our
signs are going to be changing, the whole purpose, as I think
Bill said, was to get the people to read the signs, if we ' re
going to be changing, and it ' s not just one here and there, we
have to think with everybody who ' s got to compete, if
businesses are going to have them, then all businesses are
going to have to have them. Then the drivers are going to be
distracted so much, you ' re riding down the road trying to read
all these signs and get all these different messages, and you
sure aren ' t paying attention to that other car, but that ' s
another topic .
It ' s going to be, I think, businesses have to have a level
playing field, and that ' s the thing that ' s really necessary.
So, what we set as a standard, then other businesses are just
going to have to get there to have that level playing field.
I don ' t know what kind of can of worms are we opening .
But my question, Schools or other public uses can get an LED
sign in any zoning district just by going out and putting it
up, except for a public park, and they' ve got to have approval
of City Council? And goodness knows , I hope we don ' t get LED
signs in public parks . So, Schools and other public uses in
any zoning district, just go do it . But now Religious Uses in
a Residential or Apartment District have to have a Conditional
Use Permit . What if they are in other Districts?
WILLIAM MACALI : If they are in one of the districts
that allows Electronic Display Signs,
B-lA through B-4 , they can have one By Right; otherwise, they
can ' t .
COUNCIL LADY HENLEY: Anything in an Office, a Church in an
20
Office District can' t have one,
period. A school could have one anywhere . It seems like it ' s
not the use that we ' re objecting to; it ' s the sign. And I 'm
just having trouble determining why one can do and the other
one can ' t, because it ' s the sign that ' s the issue . So,
Schools can have them anyplace with no requirement of a
Conditional Use Permit .
WILLIAM MACALI : Well, without the Conditional Use
Permit . The Planning Commission
Version is based on a sign being, typically, Schools '
freestanding signs can be how large?
KEVIN HERSHBERGER: Twenty-four (24 ) square feet, twelve
(12 ) foot overall height .
WILLIAM MACALI : Right . So, your LED portion of that
is four (4 ) by three (3 ) , or six ( 6 )
by two (2 ) .
KEVIN HERSHBERGER: Under the new Code, it would be
dropped down to the eight ( 8 ) foot .
WILLIAM MACALI : So, that ' s not a big sign. And I
have a feeling that there are those
who are going to complain that we ' re being too strict . But
given the strict size limitations and the display limitations,
Schools, almost all of them are on main roads . They may be
Zoned Residential or something like that, but they ' re on a
main road. And having an eight ( 8 ) foot high LED sign that is
maybe six ( 6 ) by two (2 ) or something like that just doesn ' t
seem that intrusive, to be very honest . That was the Planning
Commission and the staff ' s thinking on that . Public Uses are,
of course, up to the City, and the City can, there ' s no reason
to suspect that the City is going to overdo it; Council has
complete control over that .
COUNCIL LADY HENLEY: A lot of Schools are in, especially
Elementary Schools are in,
neighborhoods .
WILLIAM MACALI : Again, that ' s a small sign we ' re
talking about .
MAYOR SESSOMS: Bob?
COUNCILMAN DYER: Thank you. Coming from the People ' s
Republic in New Jersey, our
billboards had billboards on them. We just had a
proliferation of signs . And I agree; too many, not good. By
21
the same token, I think we can ' t be too hypocritical . We got
a nice sign for the Sandler Theater and we also got one for
the Convention Center right on the road, which is a pretty
good-sized one . And I think if we look not only at the LED
but at the Sign Ordinances, in general, I had the privilege of
being Saturday night in Mrs . Henley' s District at that
function at the Aviation Museum out there, and I drove right
past the place because there wasn' t a real good sign there;
and the point is, also, signs throughout the city about how to
get to this place . Now, this museum is a real potential
attraction.
COUNCIL LADY HENLEY: You couldn ' t see that thing?
COUNCILMAN DYER: Well, I saw it, but I missed the road
to get into it . It was dark and at
night . And once again, we have an amenity that a lot of
out-of-town people that come during the summer that can go
there, a perfect rainy-day place, to get there, once again,
how do people get there? So, I think, if we ' re going to take
a look at it, to be fair to our businesses, especially the
ones that we want to thrive and especially if it can bring
some cash to the city, not only to look at the LED Ordinances
but, once again, a lot of people in my district, I 've got a
lot of stores closing in my strip malls . They can' t compete
and folks don ' t know they ' re there . So, I think we 've got to
take a look.
MAYOR SESSOMS : Bill?
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: To kind of summarize, I mean, I agree
with a little bit on both sides, but
I think we need to spend a little more time working on this .
Glenn had a good recommendation. Maybe we have him and
Rosemary or him and Barbara get together and sit down with the
City Attorney and some folks and see if they can hammer out a
copy.
COUNCIL LADY WILSON: I think that ' s a good idea.
MAYOR SESSOMS: I have a note down there to do that .
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: Okay.
MAYOR SESSOMS : Glenn?
COUNCILMAN DESTEPH: I ' ll be quiet, if you want, Mayor .
MAYOR SESSOMS : I 've got that . I thought it was a
pretty good idea.
22
COUNCILMAN DAVIS : I just want to make one last comment,
because Barbara did bring up a good
point with regards to the safety. You know, whatever we
decide to come up with, whatever the reasons are we come up
with it, I want to make sure that we enforce it based on those
decisions . Obviously, we all know the reason for any sign,
whether it ' s at the Sandler Center or whether it ' s in front of
a business or whether it ' s in front of a school, is so people
driving by can see it .
And I think there ' s a lot of good reason to have that type of
sign, that type of publicity, in many cases; however, I
personally don ' t think it ' s a safety issue . And, obviously,
you can look at studies, and one thing we all know is
statistics can be made to say anything. However, if we do
decide to go and drastically change and bunker down on signs ,
we want to make sure that if we do so we also, City, Schools ,
also, obey whatever it is that we pass going forward.
So, I think if we look at things on a case by case and try to
allow a little bit of flexibility for different reasons,
different parts of the city, it may give us the best outcome
going forward. We talked about dwell time, and Bill hit on it
and I 'm sure speed has a lot to do, speed of change of the
sign has a lot to do with the safety issue, but I 'm sure that
is correlated with the speed of the vehicle, as well . If
you ' re changing once every five (5 ) seconds in a twenty-five
(25 ) mile per hour zone, obviously, it ' s kind of dangerous .
You ' re going to see five (5 ) or six ( 6 ) signs before you get
by it . If you ' re going forty-five (45) miles an hour and it
changes every ten ( 10) seconds , you ' re probably only see one
( 1) or two (2 ) swaps anyway, which is essentially what you see
on a one-minute swap .
So, I think that there ' s a lot of opportunity that we can do,
just kind of look into things a little bit more and come up
with a great middle ground that hopefully would resolve all
the issues we ' re looking at here today.
COUNCIL LADY WILSON: Good idea .
MAYOR SESSOMS : Mark?
CITY ATTORNEY: The only thing that I ' d like to add
to this conversation is the
recognition that as of right now you have no ordinance
prohibiting changeable copy signs .
MAYOR SESSOMS : I think, if there ' s something I
23
picked up on at our last meeting,
it ' s clear we 've got to get some direction. We ' ve got to come
up with some guidelines to be followed that could be changed
down the road, also. I think we need to acknowledge that .
We 've got things backed up. Mark, jump in here, unless I 'm
mistaken, that are on hold, and we ' ve got to act . I would
have no problem with, I guess, a two-week type of thing to see
if two people from here would volunteer to work on this .
Mark, we ' re hearing I 've got to act . And if there is a way to
bring things together from both or something new, it ' s worth
one shot , but we ' re going to have to act on something very
quickly. Do I have any volunteers that would be willing to
take this one up? I am not raising my hand. I 'm seeing
Barbara -- excuse me . I 'm seeing Rosemary and Glenn, if y ' all
would be kind enough?
COUNCIL LADY WILSON: Perhaps get a couple from the
Planning Commission?
MAYOR SESSOMS: That ' s your call . If they get two
from Planning, does that have to -- I
want to make sure we do this thing legally.
CITY ATTORNEY: I don ' t think that would be . That
would not be a public meeting .
MAYOR SESSOMS: Okay. We ' ll let you get the two from
Planning and let ' s see what we can
come up with. I don ' t think there ' s going to be a perfect
answer . I can already tell we ' ll have to adjust whatever we
come up with. I thank y ' all for taking this on. Let ' s be
back in two weeks with a recommendation. Thank you all very
much for doing that .
WILLIAM MACALI : Mayor, were you meaning to have this
not on for a vote in two weeks?
MAYOR SESSOMS : No . We have another one of these in
two weeks .
WILLIAM MACALI : I 'm just worried about the
advertising, to be quite honest .
MAYOR SESSOMS : And we ' ll act the following week.
We ' re going not next Tuesday but two
Tuesdays .
CITY ATTORNEY: If there are substantial changes ,
you ' ll have to send it back to
24
Planning, which means you ' re not going to have a new ordinance
until late April or May; that was my concern.
MAYOR SESSOMS : And make sure you have someone from
the City Attorney telling you what
we 've got to do . We ' re hearing the message we need something,
and you might be able to tell us what we can do now in the
interim. Thank y ' all very much for that .
(Whereupon, the discussion of this matter was
concluded. )
4
CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFINGS
PLANNING ITEMS PENDING
5:56 P.M.
Jack Whitney, Director- Planning, detailed the Planning Items to be heard by the City Council
in March 2010. Detailed items are hereby made a part of these proceedings.
MARCH 9, 2010
Roadway Guide Signs Amendment
R-5R Swimming Pools Amendment
Cape Henry Station
MARCH 23, 2010
Robert Ramsey
February 16, 2010
2/16/2010
Princess Anne Note,and Boardvna(year unknown)
March 9 Items
• Roadway Guide Signs Amendment
• R-5R Swimming Pools Amendment
• Cape Henry Station(Use Permit)
A "'.*.- ...
8103#4410116L; 7:t4
44 PLANNING ITEMS TO BE HEARD IN
MARCH,2010
Evaluation and
Recommendation
City of Va Beach • Planning Staff recommended approval
An Ordinance to amend Sections 111,211,and 212 of • Planning Commission recommends
the City Zoning Ordinance and to add a new section
211.1,defining the term"Roadside Guide Sign"and approval (10-0)
establishing requirements for allowing such signs in
the public right-of-way. • There was no opposition.
• Consent agenda
Evaluation and
Recommendation
City of Va Beach • Planning Staff recommended approval
An Ordinance to amend the City Zoning Ordinance by • Planning Commission recommends
reducing setback requirements for In-ground
swimming pools located on lots adjacent to the approval (7-3)
beaches of the Atlantic Ocean in the
R-5R Residential District.
1
2/16/2010
('ape!lent')Station,LLC' • }° r m
as-
84
1 ' '\''/ ////4 \-2-.---"3\II d.,r,o,' ,. ,,,
Ili
g A36
•
l
R7.6 .. 2
I A18 y. -
cuv.w,ae ur r �,ri
1.J., 6
•
LYNNHAVEN DISTRICT '
Relevant Information
• The applicant requests a Conditional Use
Permit to allow the installation of a roof-
mounted wind energy conversion system .,.
(wind turbine).
• Electricity generated from the system will
be used on the site.Excess will be sold to
Virginia Power.
• Proposed turbine meets the standards ,
provided in the Zoning Ordinance for this
use. '.
Evaluation and
Recommendation
- k..,w . • Planning Staff recommended approval
r • Planning Commission recommends
-. approval(10-0)
-_ ;• i I • There was no opposition.
` 4114
• Consent agenda
\say 1
2
2/16/2010
March 23 Items
Robert Ranlsi
• Robert Ramsey(Use Permit) pt 1 R30 AG,
AGt
,::::re,
/
`nom ,\.0,4,,,,
-.' ' AG2 3t
r ill
PRINCESS ANNE DISTRICT
® Relevant Information
• The applicant requests a Conditional Use
Permit for firewood preparation.
• Planning Commission deferred the
application for two months to allow the
. -641*' -'--•--- applicant to`clean up'the site.
ate. _
' 4= • Logs for the firewood are brought to the
,..-.7...„............—, ,t0 site from the applicant's tree removal
444service jobs.
• The splitting of logs occurs behind a
. � detached garage on the site.
Site prior to'clean up' Site after'clean up' <i'
— i
-on
3
2/16/2010
Evaluation and
Recommendation
• Planning Staff recommended approval
with conditions and a one-year time limit
• Planning Commission recommends
denial (10-0)
• There was no opposition.
4
5
Mayor Sessoms, Jr. DECLARED the City Council meeting ADJOURNED at 6:00
P.M
)&411-c:c ,J. �. a „
Gloria S. Winkler,MMC
Sr. Deputy City Clerk
uth Hodges Fraser,MMC
City Clerk