No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-22-2020 SPECIAL SESSION AGENDA CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH "COMMUNITY FOR A LIFETIME" CITY COUNCIL MAYOR ROBERT M. "BOBBY"DYER,At Large 44041104,, VICE MAYOR JAMES L.WOOD,Lynnhaven-District 5 JESSICA P.ABBOTT,Kempsville-District 2 0 ` MICHAEL F.BERLUCCHI,Rose Hall-District 3 U ) ra BARBARA M.HENLEY,Princess Anne-District 7 - LOUIS R.JONES,Bayside-District 4 , = JOHND.MOSS,At Large * o: AARONR.ROUSE,At Large OUR...000 GUYK.TOWER,Beach-District 6 ROSEMARY WILSON,At Large SABRINA D.WOOTEN,Centerville-District I CITY HALL BUILDING CITY COUNCIL APPOINTEES CITY COUNCIL AGENDA 2401 COURTHOUSE DRIVE CITY MANAGER-PATRICKA.DUHANEY VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23456-9005 CITY A7TORNET-MARK D.STILES PHONE.•(757)385-4303 CITY ASSESSOR-RONALD D.AGNOR September 22,2020 FAX(757)385-5669 CITY AUDITOR-LYNDONS.REMIAS E-MAIL:CI7'YCOUNCIL@vbgov.com CITY CLERK-AMANDA BARNES MAYOR ROBERT M. "BOBBY"DYER PRESIDING I. SPECIAL FORMAL SESSION -Virginia Beach Convention Center- 3:00 PM A. CALL TO ORDER—Mayor Robert M. "Bobby"Dyer 1. READING OF THE MAYOR'S CALL FOR SPECIAL SESSION B. ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL II. CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFINGS A. EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN UPDATE Erin Sutton, Director—Office of Emergency Management B. PENDING PLANNING ITEMS Kevin Kemp, Zoning Administrator Bill Landfair, Planning Evaluation Coordinator C. INTERIM FINANCIAL UPDATE/CARES ACT Alice Kelly,Director—Finance Kevin Chatellier, Director—Budget and Management Services D. BEACH REPLENISHMENT WITH THE NORFOLK HARBOR& CHANNELS DEEPENING PROJECT Phillip Roehrs, Coastal Program and Project Management—Public Works E. CIVILIAN OVERSIGHT RESEARCH AND RECOMMENDATIONS Regina Hilliard, Director—Human Resources F. OVERVIEW OF ATLANTA CIVILIAN REVIEW BOARD Samuel Lee Reid II,Executive Director—Atlanta Citizen Review Board III. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION i I IV. RECONVENE SPECIAL FORMAL SESSION -Virginia Beach Convention Center- 6:00 PM A. CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION B. PLANNING 1. WESTMINSTER CANTERBURY ON CHESAPEAKE BAY for a Modification of Conditions re home of the aged, disabled and handicapped for the properties located at 3100 Shore Drive (Approved November 14, 1977) (Deferred from August 25, 2020) DISTRICT 5—LYNNHAVEN RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL C. ADJOURNMENT *********************************** If you are physically disabled or visually impaired and need assistance at this meeting, please call the CrrY CLERK'S OFFICE at 3854303 ***************************** The Agenda(including all backup documents)is available at { https://www.vbgov.com/government/departments/city-clerk/city-council under the eDocs J Document Archive. If you would like to receive by email a list of the agenda items for each Council meeting,please submit your request to pmcgrawAvbgov.com or call 385-4303. 3 .1ti4`c,��lA'BE6i11- city of VTirgirnia Be_Ch \II. t 71 , t 2 94 e6 �� O�OU'v'v�O ROBERT M.'BOBBY'DYER MUNICIPAL CENTER MAYOR BUILDING 1,ROOM 234 2401 COURTHOUSE DRIVE VIRGINIA BEACH,VA 23458-9000 (757)385-4581 FAX(757)3855899 September 17, 2020 BDYEROVBGOV.COM HONORABLE MEMBERS OF CITY COUNCIL In accordance with the Virginia Beach City Code Section 2-21, and by the authority vested in me as Mayor of the City of Virginia Beach, I hereby call for a SPECIAL FORMAL SESSION of the VIRGINIA BEACH CITY COUNCIL Tuesday,September 22,2020 3:00 P.M. Virginia Beach Convention Center 100019`"'Street The purpose of this SPECIAL FORMAL SESSION is to allow City Council to hold City Manager briefings, and then convene into Closed Session. At 6:00 P.M., City Council will reconvene, certify the Closed Session, and then consider a planning item deferred from August 25, 2020: WESTMINSTER CANTERBURY ON CHESAPEAKE BAY for a Modification of Conditions re home of the aged disabled and handicapped for the properties located at 3100 Shore Drive (Approved November 14, 1977) (Deferred from August 25,2020)DISTRICT 5-LYNNHAVEN RECOMMENDATION:APPROVAL Citizens may comment either in person or virtually. If you would like to speak in person,please call the City Clerk's office at 757-385-4303 to sign up. If you wish to make comments virtually on an item,please follow the two-step process provided below: •Register for the WebEx at: h ttps://vbgov.webex.com/vbgov/onstage/g.php?MTID=e241756a 5a 5cObafd27ac83 ee03e53844 •Register with the City Clerk's Office by calling(757)385-4303 or via email at ABarnes@vbgov.com prior to 5:00 p.m. on September 22, 2020 This Special Formal Session will be streamed live on www.vbgov.com and Facebook Live, and will be recorded for rebroadcast on Cable TV. Citizens are encouraged to submit their comments to the City Council prior to the meeting via email at CitvCouncil@vbgov.com. Sincerely, Robert M.Dyer Mayor Cc: City Manager City Attorney City Clerk Deputy City Managers FOIA Officer Communications Office `1 G a) a) ' '6 1".. ',:i- \ Vr /.®., - i • CO , re Ln G \ tis � ii VI G a a goad �_ Cr. o 0 { 1 itCn �� MMM �— — cv j o co 71fi Lo Gd °sm oat.. . ; cc 1n- — N �-'�. pad ri al x. d Allittie —irC In gip- • co Ci __Y 'ScM 1 N t1� m o V-11 \_ .-rt--_, ii\.n, cu ,,c! __, -4.5 ,r,‘1.17.\ij, 0 ??°.1 ''''.2' .. ta. '`N,v.ki i\,. .:4 ,..%,,\\‘ b‘, a 1� t. . S\ -4--4- ,. , \ 2 \ �� ,` 41,) CO \ l=1 U .L \\k,:\INN,s_ . if:i0 a) . � 1 \\N\.. m 1) \ s� Z.p T\V-%71 ‘ 0 .11--- 17_-_- 1_ ••ave.. _ m ._ r G ° ash �� �G� � }, G\---1\ p .c30 l } i een_ ree` c, al \G_ l �. �`!, CO B ;,ii► tCO3---C :ram° 1 „_V._ ,,, a, CSa � Cam ` 0 i�` dI J G tcoa) F c w O C ;V e� �< -- ' / (n a N d c0 �m _ K7/ ®I CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM f ITEM: WESTMINSTER CANTERBURY ON CHESAPEAKE BAY [Applicant & Property Owner] Modification of Conditions to a Conditional Use Permit (Home for the Aged, Disabled & Handicapped) for the properties located at 3100 Shore Drive (GPINs 1590004510,1590100553, 1590101535, 1590102542, 1590009984, 1590009705, 1590100956). COUNCIL DISTRICT — LYNNHAVEN MEETING DATE: September 22, 2020 • Background: The application was scheduled for the August 4, 2020 City Council public hearing, but due to Tropical Storm Isaias, that meeting was cancelled, and the item rescheduled to be considered on August 25, 2020. At the August 18, 2020 informal session, the City Council agreed to defer the item to a Special Session on September 22, 2020. The City Council approved this deferral at the August 25, 2020 public hearing. In 1977, a Conditional Use Permit was granted to the property for a Home for the Aged, Disabled and Handicapped to operate a continuing care retirement community. Two modifications to the Conditional Use Permit have been granted since then. The first in 1998 allowed the construction of a 14-story building containing 164 independent living units bringing the total unit count to 627. The second, in 2008, permitted the construction of an additional parking structure for a net gain of 142 parking spaces for the campus. The applicant, Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay (WCCB), now proposes an expansion of the independent living, assisted living, and memory care facilities, which requires a Modification to the existing Conditional Use Permit. The expansion includes incorporating adjacent properties into the campus for the construction of two buildings, a 22-story independent living building and a seven- story healthcare building. These buildings will contain up to 217 independent living units, 75 assisted living units, and 48 memory care units. The expansion will result in the redevelopment of several properties adjacent to the campus that are now owned by the applicant including the Casa del Playa Condominiums, the former Lynnhaven Fish House Restaurant and the Lynnhaven Fishing Pier, and a surface parking lot along Ocean Shore Avenue. In addition, two elevated pedestrian bridges are proposed over Ocean Shore Avenue and Starfish Road to provide indoor connections between the proposed buildings and the facilities on the existing WCCB campus. The applicant also Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Page 2 of 5 proposes to relocate the existing 20-foot wide public beach access easement from its current location at the intersection of Ocean Shore Avenue and Starfish Road to the northeastern property line to accommodate the construction of the independent living building. Both the encroachment into the right-of-way by the pedestrian bridges and the relocation of the beach access easement will require authorization by City Council at a later date. • Considerations: The request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's goals and policies for the Suburban Area Bayfront Community, adjacent to the Shore Drive Corridor Suburban Focus Area. These goals and policies include the preservation and protection of the character, economic value, and aesthetic quality of established neighborhoods. The Shore Drive Corridor Plan calls for protecting, restoring and enhancing the Shore Drive corridor and encouraging development and redevelopment of the corridor as an attractive residential community. In Staff's view and the Planning Commission concurred, the proposal is generally reflective of the vision set forth in these plans through the use of high quality architecture and building materials, and an attractive well-designed proposal while expanding senior housing and care options. Consistent with the Shore Drive Corridor Design Guidelines, the articulation proposed on the new buildings' facades will provide visual interest and incorporate wall plane projections and recesses to break up the expansiveness of the exterior. The exterior colors will be low reflectance and subtle. The existing circulation pattern will remain essentially the same. According to Traffic Engineering Staff, the proposal will not result in an increase in average daily trips (ADT) over the former land uses on these sites that included a 10,300 square foot restaurant (Lynnhaven Fish House) and 30 multi-family units. In fact, the evaluation indicates the potential for a slight decrease in ADTs. A reconfiguration of the surface parking lot on the main campus and a secondary lot adjacent to Starfish Road will increase the yield of surface spaces to 210 spaces. The proposed garage that will primarily serve the new independent living building will have 399 parking spaces and the new healthcare building will have 55 surface parking spaces. This parking combined with the 432 structured parking spaces on the main campus yields a total of 1,096 parking spaces, exceeding the minimum requirement of 774 spaces. Given that the existing condition of the property to be redeveloped is primarily impervious, the proposed improvements will not result in a significant change to the amount of stormwater runoff generated by the development. The applicant is considering Low Impact Development options to reduce runoff and pollutant loads. These options may include infiltration of stormwater by bioretention, permeable pavers, and rain gardens. The stormwater management plan will be reviewed in detail during final site plan review. Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Page 3 of 5 In response to potential issues related to shadows cast by the new buildings, the applicant submitted a comprehensive shadow study that described that the greatest impact to adjacent properties will be to those to the east during the afternoon hours between the months of February and October. During the summer months, the shadow impact will be considerably less. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) conducted an aeronautical study and determined that the proposed 22-story, 250-foot tall building will not exceed obstruction standards and will not be a hazard to air navigation. There is no building height maximum for structures in the B-4 District, other than meeting the FAA requirements, per Section 904(d) of the Zoning Ordinance. As the 22-story building is designated for independent living (those without mobility limitations), it is essentially an apartment building and as such the City Fire Marshall has no objections to the height. Further details pertaining to the application, as well as Staff's evaluation, are provided in the attached Staff report. The applicant met with the Bayfront Advisory Commission, the Senior Housing Advisory Committee, as well as with several civic leagues and community groups. The application was considered by the Planning Commission on March 11, 2020 at which time they passed a motion by a recorded vote of 5-2, with 1 abstention, to recommend approval of the request. For that hearing, Staff received 50 letters of support and 47 letters in opposition, all of which were forwarded to the Planning Commission and are attached below. There were 24 speakers in opposition at the public hearing. Those opposed expressed concerns regarding a perception with a lack of conformance with the goals and policies of the Shore Drive Corridor Plan; displeasure with the proposed building height and density; the potential of increased traffic and inadequate amounts of parking; fear of wind shear and shadow impacts; and, inadequate stormwater management. Following the March 11 , 2020 Planning Commission meeting, the applicant revised the conceptual Landscape Plan to shift the eastern façade of the independent living building towards the west, away from the adjacent multi-family condominiums to the east, by 15 feet on the ground level and 11 feet on levels 2- 5. This results in an increased building setback from the eastern property line of 61 feet at ground level and 57 feet for the upper floors. In addition, the service area for the building has been redesigned to confine trash operations behind doors with walls and ceilings lined with sound attenuation panels. To further improve sound attenuation, an eight-foot tall masonry wall is now proposed along the eastern property line. The applicant has offered an additional condition since the March Planning Commission hearing, Condition #9, to ensure that the masonry wall be constructed as described and that the effects of the dock area and trash bays for the independent living building will be adequately mitigated for the benefit of the adjacent residents to the east. Finally, the elevated bridge over Starfish Road has been reduced in length and the bridge over Ocean Shore Avenue has shifted slightly to the north. As a result of the modifications to the proposed layout and building elevations, revised documents were submitted and Conditions #3 and #4 Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Page 4 of 5 below updated to reflect the new dates of the documents. While the applicant did not provide an updated Site Plan as it remains in substantial conformance with the changes described above, should the City Council approve the request, it has been made clear to the applicant that the Conceptual Landscape Master Plan, dated July 21, 2020 and referenced in Condition #4 below, will be the guiding document used by Staff during plan review. • Recommendation: On March 11 , 2020, the Planning Commission passed a motion to recommend approval of this request by a vote of 5-2, with 1 abstention. 1. All conditions except for Number 1 attached to the Conditional Use Permit for the Home for the Aged, Disabled, and Handicapped dated June 9, 1998, shall remain in effect. 2. The Property shall be developed in substantial conformance with the conceptual site plan entitled "SITE PLAN - CUP," dated November 8, 2019, and prepared by D2 Architecture (the "Site Plan"), a copy of which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning. 3. The quality of architectural design and materials of the buildings to be constructed on the Property, when developed, shall be in substantial conformance with the exhibit prepared by D2 Architecture, entitled "ELEVATIONS — CUP," and dated June 15, 2020 October 31, 2019 (the "Elevations"), a copy of which is on file with the Department of Planning and has been exhibit to the Virginia Beach City Council. 4. Landscaping installed on the Property, when developed, shall be in substantial conformance with that shown on the exhibit prepared by WPL, entitled "CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE MASTER PLAN," and dated July 21 , 2020 January 24, 2020 (the "Landscape Plan"), a copy of which is on file with the Department of Planning and has been exhibit to the Virginia Beach City Council. The exact species of the various types of landscaping shall be determined at final site plan review. 5. The Property, when developed, shall not exceed a total of 674 Independent Living units, 75 Assisted Living units, 48 Memory Support units, and 108 Skilled Nursing units. Total parking provided will be 1 ,096 parking spaces. 6. Prior to the approval of the construction plans, the applicant shall obtain City Council's approval for the encroachment of the proposed pedestrian bridges over Starfish Road and Ocean Shore Avenue. 7. Prior to the approval of the construction plans, the applicant shall have obtained the approval of City Council to relocate the existing public beach access Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Page 5 of 5 easement from its current location at the eastern terminus of Starfish Road to the proposed new location along the applicant's northeastern property line. 8. The applicant shall be responsible for any access improvements deemed necessary by Public Works/Traffic Engineering Staff, upon completion of the review of the submitted traffic impact study. 9. The independent living building, when constructed, shall have a dock area and trash bays which are fully enclosed with doors and include heavy duty sound attenuation panels lining the walls and ceilings inside the dock area. In addition, an eight foot tall masonry wall lined with brick and supplemented with additional landscaping shall be installed opposite the dock area, along the length of the eastern property line. The exact species of the various types of landscaping along the wall shall be determined at final site plan review. • Attachments: Staff Report and Disclosure Statements Revised Conceptual Landscape Master Plan, dated July 21, 2020 Location Map Minutes of Planning Commission Hearing Letters of Support (50) Letters of Opposition (47) Recommended Action: Staff recommends Approval. Planning Commission recommends Approval. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department 7 ` City Manager:f2 -p Applicant &Owner Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Agenda Item Bay Public Hearing March 11, 2020 N/Bcity, City Council Election District Lynnhaven 4 Virginia Beach Request Modification of Conditions (Home for the Aged, Disabled and Handicapped) Staff Recommendation Approval _- Staff Planner Bill Landfair Location 111 3100 Shore Drive ,,. GPINs1.1 1590004510,1590100553, 1590101535, 1590102542, 1590009984, 1590009705, 1590100956 Site Size , \--- 16.88 acres r i AICUZ Less than 65 dB DNL Watershed Chesapeake Bay Existing Land Use and Zoning District Home for the Aged, Disabled and Handicapped / B-4 Mixed Use (Shore Drive Corridor Overlay District) ; - Surrounding Land Uses and Zoning Districts ...00001111 North tVi4 Atlantic Ocean / B-4 Mixed Use South Shore Drive }. Multi-family dwellings, mixed retail/A-24 Apartment, B-2 Community Business (Shore r1 " Drive Corridor Overlay District) - ' East e ` Multi-family dwellings/ B-4 Mixed Use (Shore Drive Corridor Overlay District) ' West Multi-family dwellings/ B-4 Mixed Use (Shore Drive Corridor Overlay District) Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Agenda Item 4 Page 1 Background & Summary of Proposal • In 1977, a Conditional Use Permit was granted to the property for a Home for the Aged, Disabled and Handicapped to operate a Continuing Care Retirement Community. • Westminster Canterbury on the Chesapeake Bay(WCCB) has been operating a continuing care campus on Shore Drive since 1977. • Two modifications to the Conditional Use Permit have been granted since 1977. The first in May 1998 allowed the construction of a 14-story building containing 164 independent living units as well as an additional parking structure. The resulting additions brought the total unit count to 627,for a gross density of 50 units per acre for the entire campus. The second modification in June 2008 allowed the construction of a parking structure in the southeastern corner of the site. This structure resulted in a net gain of 142 parking spaces for the campus. • An expansion of the independent living, assisted living,and memory care facilities is proposed.The expansion includes incorporating adjacent properties into the campus for the construction of two buildings containing up to 217 independent living units, 75 assisted living units, and 48 memory care units. These adjacent properties include the Casa del Playa Condominiums, the former Lynnhaven Fishing Pier, and a surface parking lot along Ocean Shore Avenue. Based on the plans for expansion, a Modification to Conditions of the Conditional Use Permit for a Home for the Aged, Disabled and Handicapped is proposed. • The proposed expansion consists of demolishing the existing three-story Casa del Playa condominiums and constructing a 22-story independent living building on that site as well as the development of a seven-story healthcare building where the surface parking lot currently exists along Ocean Shore Avenue.The expected completion date of these improvements is 2025. • The proposed 22-story building will contain 217 independent living units and 399 structured parking spaces. This building has been designed to incorporate the latest design elements for independent living facilities following a study of similar facilities across the country. Proposed amenities will include two new restaurants,a multi-purpose room,fitness center and aerobics studio,theater, outdoor terrace,and landscaped gardens. The building will also feature sustainable design features including solar energy and green roof technologies. • Based on comments presented at the March 11, 2020, Planning Commission public hearing, the applicant has revised the concept plan to to shift the eastern facade of the independent living building towards the west, away from the adjacent condos to the east, by 15' on the ground level and 11'on levels 2-5. This will result in setback of 61 feet at ground level and 57 feet for upper floors to eastern property line. In addition,the service area for the building has been redesigned to confine trash operations behind doors,with walls and ceilings lined with sound attenuation panels. • The applicant has offered an additional condition, Condition#9, as indicated by underlined text,to ensure that the effects of the dock area and trash bays for the independent living building will be adequately mitigated on the adjacent property to the east. • The new seven-story healthcare building will be in the southeast corner of the intersection of Ocean Shore Avenue and Starfish Road and will consist of 75 assisted living units and 48 memory care units. Amenities will include two restaurants and a fitness room. Fifty-five parking spaces will be provided on-site for this facility. Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Agenda Item 4 Page 2 • The total number of units provided on the WCCB campus will be 674 independent living units, 75 assisted living units (85 beds), 48 memory care units (48 beds), and 108 skilled nursing units (108 beds). The total campus will be serviced by 1,096 parking spaces • Two elevated, fully conditioned pedestrian bridges are proposed over Ocean Shore and Avenue and Starfish Road to provide indoor connections between the proposed buildings and the facilities on the existing WCCB campus. The pedestrian bridges will maintain a clearance of 18' from the roadway. These encroachments into the rights-of-way will necessitate authorization by the City Council. The applicant has indicated that an application for the encroachment is forthcoming in the coming months in order to pursue this portion of the project. • There is an existing 20' public beach access easement located across Ocean Shore Avenue from the northern terminus of Starfish Road. WCCB proposes relocating the public beach access easement to their northeastern property line to accommodate the construction of the independent living building. The public access portion of the relocated easement will be 14' wide, with an additional 6' that will be utilized for maintenance of the public access easement. Relocating the public beach access easement will require council action later. Zoning History \____ ___________,. . # Request 1 CUP (Home for the Aged, Disabled and Handicapped) y1 ��®� Approved 11/14/1977 i I ti ,��*��� IIIAAA��'r___-� � � MOD(Modification of Conditions)Approved 6/9/1998 �� r%v ti N ,..�,,. MOD(Modification of Conditions)Approved 7/8/2008 f• 0 %off/ ';C 2 STC(Kleen Street; Ocean Avenue)Approved 7/12/1995 ffi, • •/ . ro 0 \„:, ��/%�� • 3 CUP(Residential Multiple Family Dwellings)Approved I *�i1�j/ 7 4 w ,„,,.', • 11/27/2001 �/ . / r. 4 CUP(Wedding Chapel)Approved 1/13/2009 a s \:3. \ 5 CUP(Multiple Family Dwellings)Approved 12/3/2002 wit -B-4 1116 A'1A R.se 4 r 6 STC(Avenue A; Ocean Avenue)Approved 8/19/74 Application Types MOD—Modification of Conditions or CUP—Conditional Use Permit Proffers FVR—Floodplain Variance LUP—Land Use Plan REZ—Rezoning NON—Nonconforming Use ALT—Alternative Compliance STR—Short Term Rental CRZ—Conditional Rezoning STC Street Closure SVR—Subdivision Variance Evaluation & Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the proposed Modification of Conditions for the construction of the two buildings containing up to 217 independent living units, 75 assisted living units, and 48 memory care units, along with the proposed parking. The development will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's vision for the Suburban Area Bayfront Community, the goals of which is to preserve and protect the character, economic value, and aesthetic quality of established neighborhoods. The design of the project is of a high quality that is intended to become an iconic landmark within the City of Virginia Beach. According to the Senior Housing Advisory Committee, who met with WCCB in November 2019, there is currently a lack of available higher-end senior living product in the City. Architectural Design: A narrative submitted with the application states; "Architecture for the two new proposed buildings at Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay is a derivative of durable and coastal-friendly materials Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Agenda Item 4 Page 3 blended with the client's(and residents')desire for a light and fresh aesthetic suitable for its specific time and place. Materials are predominantly low-reflectance curtainwall, high-tech coated metal panels(some white and curved,others wood-looking), and in the lower regions light brick and screening walls. The ground plane will be heavily landscaped with indigenous plant selections. The gently curving surfaces on both buildings are deliberate and metaphorically linked to wind and water, salient natural forces in this region and this site. To that end the three dominate forms on the west façade are shaped to suggest sails,another prominent icon on the waterfront. No single element of the building rises full height; no two elevations are alike." In Staffs opinion,this narrative describes buildings that should complement and frame the existing campus, while differing considerably from the existing buildings on the property in terms of their vertical orientation, architectural style, materials and color.The facades are articulated to provide visual interest and incorporate wall plane projections and recesses to break up the expansiveness of the exterior,façade colors will be low reflectance and subtle,all of which is consistent with the Shore Drive Corridor Design Guidelines. The extensive landscaping at the ground plane within generous setbacks will help to anchor the buildings, particularly along the street frontages. The overall high quality of the projects design, providing a publicly recognized senior living need within the community, is in conformance with the Shore Drive Corridor Plan recommendations for focusing on local resident needs rather than visitor needs. The applicant is planning to line the critical surfaces of the buildings with "QuietPerf" or similar type product which is an exterior panel system designed to absorb sound. The panels will be applied to critical ceiling and wall surfaces on the east side of the independent living building in order to mitigate reflected sounds originating in the dock area. It also will be applied on surfaces surrounding the emergency power generators that will be located on the extreme southwest corner of the building near the existing dock area. To minimize the potential for excessive glare from glass reflection, WCCB has stated that they will utilize low reflective glass that is well below industry standards for what constitutes problematic levels. The Landscape Master Plan depicts ample landscaping distributed throughout the site, including large shade trees, ornamental trees and shrubs, planter boxes and flower beds. Specific plant varieties have not yet been selected. Shadow Impact:The proposed 22-story tower will be approximately 250' tall. In conformance with Section 904(d)of the Zoning Ordinance,there is no maximum height limit for the district, except that no building or structure may exceed the height limit established by Section 202(b) regarding air navigation. The submitted elevations show buildings differing considerably from the existing structures in terms of their vertical orientation and architectural style. In response to potential issues related to shadows cast by the new buildings, particularly the 22-story tower,WCCB's architects have submitted a comprehensive shadow study(see synopsis on page 14 of this report). Based on the study, the greatest impact will be to adjacent properties to the east during the afternoon hours in the months of February and October. During the summer months,the impact will be considerably less. FAA Determination: The FAA has conducted an aeronautical study and determined that the proposed 22-story independent living building will not exceed obstruction standards and will not be a hazard to air navigation. A copy of the letter is found on page 17 of this report. Public Beach Access: There is an existing 20' public beach access easement located across Ocean Shore Avenue from the northern terminus of Starfish Road. In order to accommodate the construction of the independent living building WCCB proposes to relocate the public beach access easement to their northeastern property line.The public access portion of the relocated easement will be 14'wide,with an additional 6' in an adjacent service drive that will be utilized for maintenance of the public access easement. Relocating the public beach access easement will require council action later. Proposed improvements within the relocated easement will be consistent with the exhibit titled "Public Beach Access" found on page 12 of this report and will include ornamental tree and shrubs, as well as benches. Planning and Public Works Staff have reviewed the access and determined it to be consistent with the necessary public requirements. Pedestrian Bridges: The proposed development includes 2 pedestrian bridges over the public rights-of-way of Ocean Shore Avenue and Starfish Road, linking the new buildings with the existing buildings on the main campus. The bridges will maintain a minimum clearance of 18'-0" from roadway to underside of bridge. This is above the 16-foot minimum standard which is acceptable. Because the proposed bridges will be located over public rights-of-way,the Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Agenda Item 4 Page 4 encroachment must be approved by City Council to permit their location. WCCB has applied for an encroachment agreement for the bridges but intends to pursue a lease with the City for the bridges after the bridges are constructed. Both the encroachment and the lease will require council actions at later dates. Parking: Based on the current number of units, the existing campus currently maintains a parking ratio of 1.12 spaces per unit. With the proposed development, this ratio will increase to 1.21 spaces per unit. The independent living building will have 399 parking spaces within its garage and the healthcare building will have 55 surface parking spaces. In addition, a reconfiguration of the surface parking lot on the main campus, around the circular drive leading to the main entrance, and a secondary lot adjacent to Starfish Road will increase the yield of surface spaces to 210 spaces. The existing circulation pattern will remain essentially the same and the restriped parking spaces will be screened from view by new landscaping. This parking combined with the 432 structured parking spaces on the main campus yields a total of 1,096 parking spaces, exceeding the minimum requirement of 774 spaces. The required parking ratio is based on 1 space per independent living unit; 0.5 spaces per assisted living bed; 0.5 spaces per memory care bed; and 0.3 spaces per skilled nursing bed. Providing spaces above the minimum requirement is in part a reflection of the large staff employed on the campus, according to WCCB, they are currently the 10`h largest employer in the City, as well as concerns raised by the community about the adequacy of parking. Access and Circulation: The project proposes new entrances from Ocean Shore Avenue and Starfish Road. These entrances must meet City standards for width. Staff notes that the proposed one-way entrances for the health care building must be altered to accommodate full turning movements as the current design shows a directional right-in and right-out configuration. The proposed entrance for the independent living building from Starfish Road must be lined up with that road as currently there is a slight off-set. The proposed sidewalk along Starfish Road must be located completely within the right-of-way. With these revisions, to be addressed at site plan submission, the development will satisfy access standards and vehicular circulation will be adequate. There will be no increase in average daily vehicular trips over what can be generated by the existing land use today. Stormwater Management: Given that the development area consists of mostly impervious cover in the existing condition,the proposed improvements will not result in a significant change to the amount of stormwater runoff generated by the development. WCCB is considering Low Impact Development(LID) options to reduce runoff and pollutant loads may be included throughout the site. Infiltration methods such as bioretention, permeable pavers, and rain gardens may be their primary design goal. However, if the soils are not conducive to infiltration practices, the applicant has stated they will consider green roofs, stormwater planters, and manufactured treatment devices (i.e. Filterras) as necessary. Based on the above, Staff recommends approval subject to the conditions below. Recommended Conditions 1. All conditions except for Number 1 attached to the Conditional Use Permit for the Home for the Aged, Disabled, and Handicapped dated June 9, 1998, shall remain in effect. 2. The Property shall be developed in substantial conformance with the conceptual site plan entitled "SITE PLAN - CUP", dated November 8, 2019, and prepared by D2 Architecture (the "Site Plan"), a copy of which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning. 3. The quality of architectural design and materials of the buildings to be constructed on the Property, when developed, shall be in substantial conformance with the exhibit prepared by D2 Architecture, entitled "ELEVATIONS-CUP", and dated June 15, 2020 October 31, 2019(the "Elevations"), a copy of which is on file with the Department of Planning and has been exhibit to the Virginia Beach City Council. Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Agenda Item 4 Page 5 4. Landscaping installed on the Property,when developed, shall be in substantial conformance with that shown on the exhibit prepared by WPL,entitled "CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE MASTER PLAN", and dated July 21, 2020 (the "Landscape Plan"),a copy of which is on file with the Department of Planning and has been exhibit to the Virginia Beach City Council. The exact species of the various types of landscaping shall be determined at final site plan review. 5. The Property,when developed, shall not exceed a total of 674 Independent Living units, 75 Assisted Living units, 48 Memory Support units,and 108 Skilled Nursing units. Total parking provided will be 1,096 parking spaces. 6. Prior to the approval of the construction plans,the applicant shall obtain City Council's approval for the encroachment of the proposed pedestrian bridges over Starfish Road and Ocean Shore Avenue. 7. Prior to the approval of the construction plans,the applicant shall have obtained the approval of City Council to relocate the existing public beach access easement from its current location at the eastern terminus of Starfish Road to the proposed new location along the applicant's northeastern property line. 8. The applicant shall be responsible for any access improvements deemed necessary by Public Works/Traffic Engineering Staff, upon completion of the review of the submitted traffic impact study. Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances and Standards. Any site plan submitted with this application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes and Standards.All applicable permits required by the City Code, including those administered by the Department of Planning/Development Services Center and Department of Planning/Permits and Inspections Division, and the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, are required before any approvals allowed by this application are valid. The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED)concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. Comprehensive Plan Recommendations The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property as part of the Suburban Area Bayfront Community, adjacent to the Shore Drive Corridor Suburban Focus Area (SFA). This area is characterized by many well-established neighborhoods, newer high-density residential development, neighborhood and resort commercial uses,significant parks and open spaces, and proximity to the Chesapeake Bay and Lynnhaven River. The Shore Drive Corridor is an integral part of the Bayfront Community, extending from North Independence Boulevard to First Landing State Park. While primarily a residential community,the corridor shares the responsibility of being one of Virginia Beach's primary east-west connectors. The area is considered a resort neighborhood and not a resort destination. While it is the most densely populated area of the City, it is primarily a neighborhood residential area. The general planning goals and policies in the Comprehensive Plan include preserving and protecting the character, economic value, and aesthetic quality of the established neighborhoods. The Shore Drive Corridor Plan,which is adopted by reference as an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, is more specific about goals. It calls for protecting, restoring and enhancing the Shore Drive corridor; encouraging development and redevelopment of the corridor as an attractive residential community;and making improvements to current conditions in the corridor by strategically targeting limited financial resources. Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Agenda Item 4 Page 6 Natural & Cultural Resources Impacts The subject property is located within the Chesapeake Bay Watershed and a Resource Management Area of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area. The property is in the Special Flood Hazard Area as shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Map. Apart from the existing one-story pavilion, all improvements are in the AE (8) flood zone or outside the Special Flood Hazard Area.The pavilion is in the VE (9) flood zone where the existing structure subject to wave action. Through discussions with the applicant's consultant, they are aware that any improvements located in the Special Flood Hazard Area will have to meet the requirements of the Floodplain Ordinance, Appendix K, City Code, including elevating the proposed buildings above the base flood elevation with two feet of freeboard. As the site is mostly developed and consists of impervious cover in the existing condition, there does not appear to be any significant natural or cultural features associated with the site. A-C-14e&a-peake-gal2Fe-se-PoLatie-R-A-r-e.a4C-43.1aA4-va-Fia-ptc-e-w41-19.e-r-e44+1-i-Fed-fer-the construction of the buildings and A Joint Permit Application (JPA) will be required for the new outfalls and improvements proposed to the shoreline. *Strikethrough language is in error. Traffic Impacts Street Name Present Volume Present Capacity Generated Traffic Shore Drive 33,700 ADT1 36,900 ADT 1(LOS°"D") Existing Land Use 2-1,084 ADT Proposed Land Use 3-781 ADT 1 Average Daily Trips 2as defined by 30 residential 3as defined by 75 units assisted °LOS=Level of Service condominiums and 10,301 sf living care,48 units memory care, restaurant and 217 units independent living care There are no existing traffic counts available for Ocean Shore Avenue and Starfish Road. Master Transportation Plan (MTP)and Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Near the site, Shore Drive is classified as a four-lane divided major urban arterial. The existing roadway infrastructure is located within an approximate 130-foot right-of-way. The Master Transportation Plan proposes a six-lane facility within a 165-foot right-of-way. Currently, this segment of roadway is functioning near capacity at a Level of Service D. Ocean Shore Ave and Starfish Road are considered two-lane undivided local streets. The existing roadway infrastructure is located within a 60 foot and 80-foot right-of-way, respectively. They are not on the City's Master Transportation Plan. There is a roadway Capital Improvement Program project slated for this area. Shore Drive Corridor Improvements Phase III (CIP 2-117) will improve vehicular and pedestrian traffic flow as well as safety in the roadway and intersections. Storm drainage will be improved, and eight-foot-wide sidewalks will be provided with on-street bike lanes. The limits of the project extend from Vista Circle through the Great Neck Road intersection. Public Utility Impacts Water The proposed development must be connected to City water. Existing water services may be used or upgraded to accommodate the proposed development. Each parcel must be individually metered with separate meters from residential and commercial use. There is an existing 16-inch City water transmission main along Shore Drive and two existing 10-inch water mains along Starfish Road. Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Agenda Item 4 Page 7 Sewer The proposed development must be connected to City sanitary sewer. Each parcel must have an individual and exclusive sewer connection. There is an existing 10-inch City sanitary sewer gravity main which increases to a 12-inch along Shore Drive; there is an existing 16-inch HRSD force main along Shore Drive; and there is an existing 8-inch City sanitary sewer gravity main along Starfish Road. Public Outreach Information Planning Commission • The applicant met with the Bayfront Advisory Commission as well as members of the Shore Drive Coalition of Civic Leagues on November 21, 2019 to discuss the details of the request. According to City Staff in attendance, comments were generally positive, and no major concerns were raised. A second meeting with the Shore Drive Coalition of Civic Leagues was held on February 24, 2020. Concerns raised at that meeting include building height and relocation of the beach access easement. • The applicant also met with residents of the Starfish Shores Condominiums and Bayview Villa Condominiums on November 19, 2019, residents of Ocean Shore Condominiums on December 17, 2019, and the Lynnhaven Colony Civic League on February 8, 2020. To date, Staff has received one letter in support and eight letters in opposition. Concerns raised include building height, beach access easement, parking, and traffic. • As required by the Zoning Ordinance, the public notice sign(s) was placed on the property on February 10, 2020. • As required by State Code, this item was advertised in the Virginia Pilot Beacon on Sundays, February 23, 2020 and March 1, 2020. • As required by City Code, the adjacent property owners were notified regarding the request and the date of the Planning Commission public hearing on February 24, 2020. • This Staff report, as well as all reports for this Planning Commission's meeting, was posted on the Commission's webpage of www.vbgov.com/pc on March 5, 2020. City Council • As required by State Code, this item was advertised in the Virginian-Pilot Beacon on Sundays, August 9, 2020 and August 16, 2020. • As required by City Code, the adjacent property owners were notified regarding both the request and the date of the City Council's public hearing on August 12, 2020. • The City Clerk's Office posted the materials associated with the application on the City Council website of https://www.vbgov.com/government/departments/city-clerk/city-council/Documents/BookmarkedAgenda.pdf on August 21, 2020. Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Agenda Item 4 Page 8 Original Site Plan • W 0i pp t ii re R W i I ; hE r. e a . 5id FJ ii�uI -O a - I , I :fIAPS f0 • L _ z1 - - - - - - - , r- — t-I - - - 8 11t. , . L I 1 I 3- , '1[. •• 1 - I _..... i . E L I •t. _ - II _- I _ I r,. 4 , ; 1= � [ ' 1 1„1- 1F I ,..,. ._ I_-- . i ] L. l' ''I I - _ .�T t .! - M SiARf 1„ RO.IC. 11 1 * ''1 ;f I } I. . 1' , ryQy €t: C; /' III R_L11i 0. ili'.>o�.c ' R20g0 r. Ili I $11 V I!jg .._ I S 'ii ii 11!ler r Y g I!Rt Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Agenda Item 4 Page 9 CO Q N. r� V IZ PLAN KEY uN e) 0INDEPENDENT LIVING BUILDING 0 m. ,•, 0 ROO•TOP GARDEN TERRACE i T G OS PAVILION Q s .■ O PlIB11C B[ACN ACCESS 73 ■1■ Of TIRE LANE I SERVICE ROAD '�0 OA REINFORCED TURF ^` 1�1I NiI. P' O PLANT MIDI(TYPICAL) W 1.,,,. . I ,< - � I 1j _I� � B r•vus aYrlCAu Q • ® 1........IIII ' - w O CROSSWALKS(TYPICAL) A l� 10 SKY BRIDGE ^, • / ` - 111.1 I O I O ` V GREEINRO F PUISDING10 O 0 I.l__irl } 1! GREEN RODE ID { Mil iArle t,,,,E[--_-�L[�� {' IJ DROP-OEf • ' :,, 0 Hs, �/; i` _ t '!' r.. y EO PARKING g .��R.._ F. it I 1© NEW EAR%LNG l01 DJ I" { I'. S :. IT M. IA EAST TOWER e. 1', f n- /)()7 ; .-.�Q-•-%i JET ' 1© EXISTING BUILDING E V �` ((./.��`+ I'v nY® • 2' CEAN SHORE AVENUE O EXISTING OUTDOOR AMENITIES 4f;.�. ''''" Y.--L.J ••-'''•I yT, 'Co�RE aa .r.:r•r. Ir EXISTING PARKING •{ l"'•` -- IDJ r q 13' O ADDITIONAL PARRNG SPACES • PININIMS ' 4 N 1 .. !I E%ISnNG TILE ETYPICALI o. �a. I si ` +, ��.. � ! {:� `. _' II V tf NEW CANOPY TREE(TYPICAL) \ , �3 15 T 4I , ® • !) NEW FLOWERING TRITE 111PICAlI NA ' , O o N MONUMENT SIGN I� r40 ! e T !S GE NERATOR.MANSUORM1 R AREA L ` _.�. . _III i E..E ▪ Karam \Lf itgi i...`: _,f I (�p y — Prow+]wwn SLOP ...AVA%m,CE, 1 )' .'I' 1ENR L r ( q ~ RBWRR.w IDA.m al.NAN. �am ` E . L(� R. E MINIYA...R w.w.N I piy ` Lw.r•e 01^aN.,�.. a-n ra6On II (IN VI / *TN& Sp «T � I - " , c..,x... —rrmrT IYri E manes,..N. i f I � ( MN......P.. ew.wn.Vll AC • S ww.w WAIN rF y� Emir.Lamm. 033 SO PT ENT6) C u . •- / I. o IWm E132100001.1 +'I 1LI'I _.\� I 9 E.Mq Own Spay r1WAF . 46m ET 3E1 «. VmrT T% NWwvl •P UF* ..o3o.1mfT p3% = .1 P .WY.Treentmce. ,v. -_ � - ... .. Cr c SHORE DRIVE 20 0 40 80FT ES CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE MASTER PLAN 2)9-0110 WESTMINSTER CANTERBURY JUlY2,.2°20 D n- Virginia Beach,Virginia \Xkstminster, WGREENBRIER ® ARCHITECTURE Ri•CIO rD WPL I LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS-LAND SURVEYORS-CIVIL ENGINEERS (jmteThury a! 0_ rw 0 ... n! UU CDD (D ro a)A 0 A -< I PLAN KEY Ol INDEPENDENT LIVING BUILDING ( O ROOFTOP GARDEN TERRACE OO PAVILION O PUBLIC BEACH ACCESS _._ 0FIRE LANE/SERVICE ROAD 1�-- -O ' 0REINFORCED TURF `/ �` < � •L \i O PLANT BEDS(TYPICAL) --r_-' /\J ••cal O (AVERS(TYPICAL) -- DCW O CROSSWALKS(TYPICAL) - - El TS _'Vi MIN 1 O I __-... -O 10 SKY BRIDGE / l. 11 HEALTHCARE BUILDING Lip, // / O ` O r - IS GREEN ROOF 4/ ' I. IJ DROP-Off ( i n 11 LARKING "imi I e , _-. f r ���+-- 1© NEW PARKING LOT t )/ // 1�F / M, n -7 IRF:( �" r - 16 EAST TOWER I. ® F / is .f„ ` IS _ 1J FL; u=1)4 " 6� j I O ww"" 17 EXISTING BUILDING Ill (, ! , I / F i--- 1 EAMENITIES OCEAN SHORE AV E N U Ei h:I -7 C 19 EXISTING PARKINGG ® `� ®kr iuid.ic ®A '1'." r 21 EXISTING TREE(TYPICAL) j .. -\ \ + B O ■ 22 NEW CANOPY TREE(TYPICAL) /-I. ` Wilt � Ix — (=/� r,111 r 23 NEW FLOWERING TREE(TYPICAL) '' ` C- CD T ^ 17 .: -. 'WPM®. p 21 MONUMENT SIGN I ) - j1 i • O 11 �yp^TNt• 25 GENERATOR/TRANSFORMER AREA I_ i. 0 "r Main BoNJR5SRe W r 6'A.66T SOFT a,].6 AC S. __ . �J Marro Wetlanroper.u ar,rom,nrc s],Js,so O I �:, icy - I 'Si ya O E...ry ne+ re .;3pe,eas SOFT(se^s, �„ r by AvIAA� F.aamg Green Spec, .;222.503 SO FT 02,1 yg argweee Impervious 321 492 SOFT(ISM? 'y .1 ^ I 7 7 t x IBPIProposed Green Space «-209.6%SO FT(39nel r ail �l j �� ., �� IL Bu1Nln9 SNe 111,61F BO FT or La AC / i/ I'a.A� / r RSne /4� � � _�✓`ii/ '•I .( ',• 'a. / J Inpwba «-11BM SOFT (TIE%) L / N a Grow8824 «-21,00E SOFT (22%) a pram tool) Irl ( i 1 / Healthcare BUNMM Lb WIG SOT 1.2A0 / �j Existing Site Area ex.Wrlar, I (8'] 4 l � 1 • - Mar eh Wens orM. RawBM 21,BWSO FT � OV t/ i 4Ev el.g hrTrona+e 44 40,084BO FT (78%) ik I EvtNag Green Span -12,INB SOFT RI%1 „`. \ Proposed ImMrvon «-IOASSSO FT (77%) j 1 Propose Green Specs «-12.041 SORT (28%) almm Inch.,green moll � _ �j s.a r� , a gym( SHORE DRIVE 20 0 40 80 FT " CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE MASTER PLAN 219-0110 WESTMINSTER CANTERBURY JULY21,2020 Virginia Beach, Virginia StTlnSt>`Cr 6GREENBRIER ® ARCHITECTURE WPL I LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS-LAND SURVEYORS-CIVIL ENGINEERS nt Revised Elevations, Dated 6/15/2020 ,,.i t Ail . 7_,.... ,! E••••• I'. r .11 "4..f.sil 4.'k. a ;!i?- ' g 0 k t i •- '' i lap ! f. I. 1 • - E 1 i i 9 1 If it!tsjd ..Ec) '1 0 - •5i : : s ,• - P:i "1 I li k: -.;... -,,,, t __Er.7E1 . aa a 1 i i e - - H.. "..1 .+f :::...z: N if I ii 0 - , ; urn,. ; .- -$ ..,-- faildiai- , _ iFi;...,,,j ; t s... • . F- .am100" 1 1 :-grr • I• • fix-_-7, i; sio•EE---6 ''. 11111111:. : 11 ;il' 1 11 Isl. . al L ! .-. .-..-, f:. L .. cam --', a ( ilg44R=1 e: Rama i .1 MIN. 1 MN' titedi - -2 I=Es Y 1 i I7'7_ i u .-. imi I— g _ , 112111111 -. ' -1 .. Y WM A _.- i' , , = I. "'''' M '.: , Eli 1, ; , ,-,. i 1 ' ::::: - c ±. ' il ps '111 _et`i aganIC Arli login ginq I:tin I: -Kt . i ; 1 ' 2GID -' ---;. IIIIIIIIE11111111 1 = I 'i HEIHU 75 iz = == oc. ,00c oc _ I t 4- • .= == Do-oloopocl i I-nil ,...,.. . ... !=rzz.".... • 131:1.00,123CCIC - I i ?.; . PEE3 Ell i , iii - E 5 if ii 0 it: '',1--f onir-7 i t . two :14 im- le la-le el 42Z• i s' 41111°, '.1': • 1 — ..,..,- .- ...,-N. • ... t , !!... rorare- trarir-ziew-gl L UL. t a • I -61 -.i a sl 3 ::: ,... -- :.. ga,---.,ina:man:13:3:13:331ii- 6:i - ' ,---i, , - .I. - .M-1•”•••=•(?•• I - - :-- 4 - 4 1 gi a g 4 liF _ a . b d if iri t * ii Pi • • • • low• Iii•a• MO. ' . . 6 1:11t t t II 1 • , . vii .., lilt , - ;_:::,:V-#.-:f l it - 1 ===.- ..— . _ --r---1.7= '-- , • • -- --- , i • low: ,... • ERER- In.' - 5. IC- E - . • -, ; • — '--- ;.. .; =a . E . EIEEE f_- .14.411.1 '2EEIEgEuHEN -—I- - a - suaggag s ga ,Ow -- . -- --- 5-5 a5 ----- -3 3 2 al=L. — _ :xi [ 1111111 11. — l -• ii I 1 : - m am •••= ; = --r. *Bilinillfilli 1 - 2mm■Imii !- -, F :::, -2111111"inalgalia LEON- . — ,.m........ - - - ----,_ .... Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Agenda Item 4 Page 11 Proposed Public Beach Access Exhibit O :l 0 i a aY .. < z A 0 U I ti + i ' _� 6, .,_ i --e----f,:.,..,44,.. ._ . x I . -:411!!!!!!!!!!!!iiir F q ii, pp. If :� � t - $I* 1 -, , (i) I . _ • • . �i- : n :- i l.r.G G;. N .: .,-F ' f f 111. A• tt•�71.4 '. I %. fikffi i ...• ;'..t.:4,.- , , , . -,,...... .... •.. fiikt t,. o,i....f1. m 1L o V ..i. x 1—.c Qt r ,. 1 t gl gu i yo r , i m g V f 1 . . Fll - !... ..,;:,...t.,: f . ._ Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Agenda Item 4 Page 12 Proposed Pedestrian Bridges ." ..... , ..... ,l 4 iv - Ne?-4.. • . - -..,- i.,. . • ' •, : ,...• -t1 1 .14r,IP.6--•46' - II li0..,„_4:411011..4- I . i I , r*Pliii . • t IP I h, t b_tt. ., . 3, . • , ...i. 3 4,4 $. ....•-., --..... ..:•-17,es k- k k . a " r;,,_ A 0., r..., - •,‘-' I - . 44,,, ,....• I I 1 —^ I -4 f.e-: -P‘' '" '.11:5-''l . • .'- ..' 1 ','''. - ..1 4, .,': •:-114 ' llii 11 ' "."4 4:" 1`.r--' ,'-''r' - - •:'. - - ., .._ ., .1' .. - - , ..... • .;,' - to * : 14")%if: li = 1 4:`• li... : 1# ,'':' '-. * — 0.7..s.,.074 - I . -3111t t,e--‘,,,,11'.:,, * ' , '. ,., ).".' "v-;(); - ' . 0: .-0.-. • ‘ , 44.1 4'I. • .. ' — .-----1 17, ' • - - i__1, 4."....-,144 "'"M ' ' -milmo.ag• • I•11.16,au. _ — It, ...- , . . -,--444•11k.s-...-4.--4:N,,,,-, . • i,,,....-ir-- - t.........., A -• II I C ,-..•I Ilse , . II 110 •---- - it 1 ... - . 1 7% — li # 4 III t . 1 .. _ ‘.• ,i i ‘ 1 1, —. , -. j .• -41111.111111110111 ii.' :: ' '':';',•.,'''-''''''‘=',"."‘I','% .,:?',.',124,' : --, ,: . ' 4... el; ' i —647-Ve ..'':''' •,..of , ir. ' r 1 . .• ''4 ,,4,,.,-;,...„......,..-,...,4., -,..,--•1-,' -'..e- , -,w •-,.-,,.....1. ,-.--%-.03:r-:+4, - 'II-' y • ,, c".' 1 '0 '',1+,'.Cr`;4;,.$0`' ''.';e4',4*W'r.•,',' - . . ,.. .,..: • ,'''',.4-•i• . '' .'. „i' Vic ; , .1---,,'"*:*?4•,-.47 -. • * 1 _.1, .64t............,. ...kiiiii .""-Aill! A - , -vill•me. r --.. • ". --—— '' , , -;.,5:.0..•-• ''' L. 4 .... -;....„ . - , , . . Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Agenda Item 4 Page 13 Four Season Solar Study— Greatest Impact EXISTING CAMPUS PROPOSED CAMPUS —_ - FEBRUARY ,�- _-- -- 4 PM .-,_ -- _ . i/E f" "'* , glgPCGIIIft MAY - _ .��_ 4 PM �° "x r � -411101M` l -� V Isocangir 4 PM _roc_ -, -- -- f . ; � -. • ` OCTOBER _, Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Agenda Item 4 Page 14 Site Photos - --got i .`- . 0oe a • y .. _ gyp +�. hT P 1110 j ! - � • ,40011111, • Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Agenda Item 4 Page 15 Previous Conditions of Approval The Modification of the Conditional Use Permit for a Home for the Aged, Disabled and Handicapped was approved by the City Council on July 8, 2008. The Modification has three (3)conditions: 1. All conditions with the exception of Number 1 attached to the Conditional Use Permit granted by the City Council on June 9, 1998 remain in effect. 2. Condition Number 1 of the June 9, 1998 Conditional Use Permit is deleted and replaced with the following: a. The parking structure shall be developed substantially in accordance with the submitted "SITE PLAN DIAGRAM AND CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN—WESTMINSTER CANTERBURY" prepared by WPL Landscape Architects Land Surveyors Civil Engineers, dated April 1, 2008. Said plans have been exhibited to the City of Virginia Beach City Council and are on file in the Planning Department. b. The parking structure shall be constructed substantially in accordance with the submitted "PERSPECTIVE PLANS LABELED 1-3, ELEVATIONS LABELED 4, SITE PLAN LABELED 5, AND LEVEL ONE, TWO, AND THREE LABELED 6, 7, AND 8" prepared by SFCS, dated March 27, 2008. Said plans have been exhibited to the City of Virginia Beach City Council and are on file in the Planning Department. c. Trees on the site shall be preserved to the greatest of the applicant's ability substantially in accordance with the submitted "TREE PRESERVATION PLAN—WESTMINSTER CANTERBURY", prepared by WPL Landscape Architects Land Surveyors Civil Engineers, dated May 14, 2008. Said plans have been exhibited to the City of Virginia Beach City Council and are on file in the Planning Department. 3. The applicant volunteers to make a donation to the City's Tree Restoration—Shore Drive Area Trust Fund in the amount of$4,000 to partially offset the loss of live oak (Quercus Virginia) trees on the property to be developed. The Conditional Use Permit for a Home for the Aged, Disabled, and Handicapped was approved by the City Council on June 9, 1998.The Conditional Use Permit has five (5)conditions: 1. The Conditional Use Permit is approved for the addition of a four-level parking structure, 164 independent living units, and minor revisions to the existing structure, as depicted on the submitted site plan. Development shall substantially conform to the site plan prepared by SFCS Architects and on file with the Department of Planning. 2. Prior to final site plan approval, more detailed architectural renderings, elevations, and materials and color samples shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Director or designee, to ensure compatibility with the existing senior housing facility and the surrounding area. 3. The applicant shall be responsible for any access improvements deemed necessary by City Traffic Engineers, upon completion of the review of the submitted traffic impact study. 4. Revisions to the depicted infiltration system configuration(s) may be required in conjunction with final site plan review. 5. The parking structure design shall include walls at each level of sufficient height to screen automobile headlights, to prevent glare onto adjacent properties. Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Agenda Item 4 Page 16 FAA Letter -- Mail Processing Center Aeronautical Study No. Federal Aviation Administration0 2019-AEA-9933-0E Southwest Regional Office Prior Study No. _.r' Obstruction Evaluation Group 2019-AEA-8398-0E 10101 Hillwood Parkway Fort Worth,TX 76177 Issued Date:0912312019 R.J.Nutter/Of Counsel Westminster Canterbury of Hampton Roads Inc. 3100 Shore Drive Virginia Beach.VA 23451 ""DETERMINATION OF NO HAZARD TO AIR NAVIGATION"" The Federal Aviation Administration has conducted an aeronautical study under the provisions of 49 U.S.C.. Section 44718 and if applicable Title 14 oldie Code of Federal Regulations.part 77.concerning: Structure: Building Westminster Canterbury Proposed Building Location: Virginia Beach,VA Latitude: 36-54-43.70N NAD 83 Longitude: 76-04-39.00W Heights: 12 feet site elevation(SE) 287 feet above ground level(AGL) 299 feet above mean sea level(AMSL) This aeronautical study revealed that the structure does not exceed obstruction standards and would not be a hazard to air navigation provided the following condition(s).if any.is(are)met: As a condition to this Determination.the structure is to be marked/lighted in accordance with FAA Advisor) circular 7017460-1 L Change 2.Obstruction Marking and Lighting.red lights-Chapters 4.5(Red).&12. An) failure or malfunction that lasts more than thirty(30)minutes and affects a top light or flashing obstruction light,regardless of its position,should be reported immediately to(877)487-6867 so a Notice to Airmen (NO1 AM)can be issued.As soon as the normal operation is restored.notify the same number. It is required that FAA Form 7460-2,Notice of Actual Construction or Alteration,be e•filed any time the project is abandoned or: At least 10 days prior to stan of construction(7460-2.Part I) _X_Within 5 days after the construction reaches its greatest height(7460-2.Part 2) This determination expires on 03/23/2021 unless: (a) the construction is started(not necessarily completed)and FAA Form 7401-2.Notice of Actual Construction or Alteration,is received by this office. (b) extended.revised.or terminated by the issuing office. (e) the construction is subject to the licensing authority of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)and an application for a construction permit has been filed,as required by the! ('C,within Page I of 2 Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Agenda Item 4 Page 17 FAA Letter 6 months of the date of this determination.In such case,the determination expires on the date prescribed by the FCC for completion of construction,or the date the FCC denies the application. NOTE:REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD OF THIS DETERMINATION MUST BE E-FILED AT LEAST 15 DAYS PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION DATE.AFTER RE-EVALUATION OF CURRENT OPERATIONS IN THE AREA OF THE STRUCTURE TO DETERMINE THAT NO SIGNIFICANT AERONAUTICAL CHANGES HAVE OCCURRED,YOUR DETERMINATION MAY BE ELIGIBLE FOR ONE EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD. This determination is based,in part,on the foregoing description which includes specific coordinates,heights, frequency(ics)and power.Any changes in coordinates,heights,and frequencies or use of greater power,except those frequencies specified in the Colo Void Clause Coalition;Antenna System Co-Location;Voluntary Best Practices,effective 21 Nov 2007,will void this determination.Any future construction or alteration,including increase to heights,power,or the addition of other transmitters,requires separate notice to the FAA.This determination includes all previously filed frequencies and power for this structure. If construction or alteration is dismantled or destroyed,you must submit notice to the FAA within 5 days after the construction or alteration is dismantled or destroyed. This determination does include temporary construction equipment such as cranes,derricks,etc.,which may be used during actual construction of the structure.However,this equipment shall not exceed the overall heights as indicated above.Equipment which has a height greater than the studied structure requires separate notice to the FAA. This determination concerns the effect of this structure on the safe and efficient use of navigable airspace by aircraft and does not relieve the sponsor of compliance responsibilities relating to any law,ordinance,or regulation of any Federal,State,or local government body. If we can be of further assistance,please contact our office at(817)222-5922,or debbie.cardenas@faa.gov.On any future correspondence concerning this matter,please refer to Aeronautical Study Number 2019-AEA-9933- OE. Signature Control No:415887761-417933659 (DNE) Debbie Cardenas Technician Page 2 of 2 Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Agenda Item 4 Page 18 Disclosure Statement Virginia Beach APPLICANT'S NAM EWestminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay DISCLOSURESTATEMENT FORM The completion and submission of this form is required for all applications that pertain to City real estate matters or to the development and/or use of property in the City of Virginia Beach requiring action by the City Council or a board, commission, or other body appointed by the City Council. Such applications and matters include, but are not limited to,the following: Acquisition of Property Disposition of City I Modification of by City Property + Conditions or Proffers Alternative Economic Development Nonconforming Use Compliance,Special Investment Program Changes Exce•tion for (EDIP) Board of Zoning Encroachment Request Rezoning A•P_eats -- Certificate of Floodplain Variance Appropriateness i Street Closure (Historic Review Board) Franchise Agreement Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Lease of City Property Subdivision Variance Board Conditional Use Permit License Agreement i Wetlands Board The disclosures contained in this farm are necessary to inform public officials who may vote on the application as to whether they have a conflict of irmteriest tg filer Ving)'.mlita law. SECTION 1 / APPLICANT DISCLOSURE -- —_ --- to FOR CITY USE ONLY/All disclosures must be updated two(2)weeks prior to any Page 1 of 7 RennIng Commission and City Council meeting that pertains to the appllcatlon(s). APPLICANT NOTIFIED OF HEARING DATE Q/ NOCHANGESASOF DATE QJ%L 20 ir4, I.Atit hiR. REVISIONS SUBMITTED DATE Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Agenda Item 4 Page 19 Disclosure Statement Virginia Beach Ei Check here if the APPLICANT IS NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business,or other unincorporated organization I^I Check here if the APPLICANT IS a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. (A) List the Applicant's name:t'`_estminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay If an LLC, list all member's names: If a CORPORATION, list the the names of all officers, directors, members, trustees, etc.below: (Attach list if necessary) Richard Thurman, Chairman ; Richard Burroughs, Vice Chairman ; Lisa B. Smith, Secretary ; John Cavanaugh, Treasurer ; Ben Unkle, President and CEO ; David Myers, Chief Financial Officer (B) List the businesses that have a parent-subsidiary 1 or affiliated business entity 2 relationship with the Applicant: (Attach list if necessary) Westminster-Canterberry cn Chesapeake Bay Foundation Westminster-Canterberry at Home,LLC Westminster-Canterberry Realty,LLC Senior Options,LLC, S.O.Realty.LLC, Lynnhaven Inlet Fishing Pier Corporation See next page for information pertaining to footnotes and 2 SECTION 2 / PROPERTY OWNER DISCLOSURE Complete Section 2 only ifproperty owner is different from Applicant. 1 Check here if the PROPERTY OWNER IS NOT a corporation, partnership, firm, business, or other unincorporated organization. X Check here if the PROPERTY OWNER IS a corporation,partnership,firm, business.or other unincorporated organization, AND TH61M, complete the following. (A) List the Property Owner's name:Lynnhaven Inlet Fishing Pier Corp If an LLC, list the member's names: Page 2 of 7 Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Agenda Item 4 Page 20 Disclosure Statement a 4M If a Corporation, list the names ofall officers, directors, members, trustees, etc. below: (Attach list if necessary) President-J.Benjamin Unkle,Jr.,Vice President-Victoria Crenshaw,Secretary -Treasurer-David B. Myers (B) List the businesses that have a parent-subsidiary 1 or affiliated business entity 2 relationship with the Property Owner: (Attach list if necessary) 1 'Parent-subsidiary relationship'means 'b relationship that exists when one corporation directly or indirectly owns shares possessing more than 50 percent of the voting power of another corporation." See State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act,Va. Code§22-3101. 2 'Affiliated business entity relationship" means "a relationship, other than parent-subsidiary relationship,that exists when (i)one business entity has a controlling ownership interest in the other business entity,(II)a controlling owner in one entity is also a controlling owner in the other entity,or (iii)there is shared management or control betweer the business entities. Factors that should be considered in determining the existence of an affiliated business entity relationship include that the same person or substantially the same person own or manage the two entities;there are common or commingled funds or assets; the business entities share the use of the same offices or employees or otherwise share activities, resources or personnel on a regular basis; or there is otherwise a close working relationship betweer the entities" See Slate and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act, Va.Code§ 2.2-3101. SECTION 3. SERVICES DISCLOSURE Are any of the following services being provided in connection with the subject of the application or any business operating or to be operated on the Property. If the answer to any item is YES, please identify the firm or individual providing the service: IF THE OWNER AND APPLICANT ARE DIFFERENT, EACH MUST COMPLETE THE SECTION SEF'B ATELY Page 3 of 7 Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Agenda Item 4 Page 21 Disclosure Statement APPLICANT Virginia Beach 1 YES NO I SERVICE PROVIDER(use additional sheets it neededi M Accounting and/or preparer of j your tax return IXIEl Architect / Landscape Architect / D-2Architecture / J Land Planner I Contract Purchaser(if other than C z theApplicant)—identify purchaser and purchaser's service providers Any other pending or proposed L purchaser of the subject property (identify purchaser(s)and • purchaser's service providers) • �Inl Construction Contractors Whiting Turner - I^I El Engineers/Surveyors/Agents Kimlev-Horn,WPL.Volkert and CPP,Inc Financing (include current Sun Trust Bank mortgage holders and lenders �j�l selected or being considered to provide financing for acquisition or construction of the property) Trdubnen Senders,Rued Smith,Vwwc b Savage I5<l n Legal Services Real Estate Brokers/ ri (XI Agents/Realtors for current and t anticipated future sales of the subject property -__ ----_ SECTION 4. KNOWN INTEREST BY PUBLIC OFFICIAL OR EMPLOYEE YES NO Does an official or employee of the City of Virginia Beach have ® an interest in the subject land or any proposed development contingent on the subject public action? If yes, what is the name of the official or employee and what is the nature of the interest? Page 4 of 7 Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Agenda Item 4 Page 22 Disclosure Statement Virginia Beach CERTI F1 Ck7I QN: I certify that all of the information contained in this Disclosure Statement Form is complete,true,and accurate. I understand that, upon receipt of notification that the application has been scheduled for public hearing, I am responsible for updating the information provided herein two weeks prior to the Planning Commission, Council, VBDA meeting, or meeting of any public body or committee in connection with this Application. ArRI S dWNTN ArIti n w' DATEt Page 6 0f 7 Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Agenda Item 4 Page 23 Next Steps • Upon receiving a recommendation from Planning Commission,this request will be scheduled for a City Council public hearing. Staff will inform the applicant and/or their representative of the date of the hearing in the upcoming days. • Following City Council's decision,the applicant will receive a decision letter from Staff. • Once the conditions of approval are in place and/or completed,the applicant must contact the Zoning Division of the Planning Department to obtain verification that the conditions have been met. Contact the Zoning Division at 757-385-8074. • If the request requires land disturbance and/or a subdivision of property, please contact the Development Services Center(DSC)to discuss next steps for site plan/plat review. Contact the DSC at 757-385-4621 or the Development Liaison Team at 757-385-8610. • Please note that further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances and Standards.Any site plan submitted with this application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes and Standards.All applicable permits required by the City Code, including those administered by the Department of Planning/Development Services Center and Department of Planning/ Permits and Inspections Division,and the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, are required before any approvals allowed by this application are valid. • The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED)concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Agenda Item 4 Page 24 Item#4 Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Modification of Conditions (Home for the Aged,Disabled and Handicapped) 3100 Shore Drive March 11,2020 RECOMMEND FOR APPROVAL-HEARD Ms. Sandloop: Okay, we are going to hear agenda item number four for Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay, an application for a modification of conditions to a home for the aged, disabled and handicapped on 3100 Shore Drive properties located at the intersection of Star Fish Road and Ocean Shore Avenue located in the Lynnhaven District. Mr. Nutter: Thank you Pam. Mr. Chairman Weiner. Mr. Inman: Before we begin,I'm going to need to abstain on this item as my law firm represents several condominium associations which are in immediate vicinity of this application site, including one that immediately adjacent and so I will not be participating in the hearing or discussion or voting. Mr. Weiner: Thank you, sir. Mr. Nutter: Thank you Mr. Inman. First for the record, my name is RJ Nutter; I'm an attorney and represent the applicant. And I am also wanting to begin by thanking staff, and particularly the Planning Department who have tried to shepherd this application through virtually every department of the city and before we get into this room, you know, that I want you to know we've been through an exhaustive review and Mr. Coston that includes the Fire Department, I want you to know that this was the first group we wanted to go talk to before we began the planning of this project. So once we have assurance that the Fire Departments on board with this application, but they've done a wonderful job,they've had to respond to a large number of inquiries from the public, from my client, from our consultants, so I really appreciate their indulgence. But if I could, I would like to say first I'm very proud to represent Westminster because many people don't count Westminster when they're counting residents on Shore Drive. In fact, there are over 700 residents in Westminster Canterbury that all call 3100 Shore Drive their permanent home. They live there, they've retired from there,in some cases they work from there,but in all cases,that's their residence just like anyone else in town. Ms. Wilson: RJ if you could speak up. That could be appreciated by the audience. Mr. Nutter: Okay, I beg your pardon. I'll do my best. This microphone only goes so close. At any rate, in addition to that Westminster's also, only one of two CCRCs for Continuing Care, Retirement Communities in the city. It was, as you know, the first beginning over 40 years ago and the interesting part about that is because we're seeking expansion, the other CCRC Atlantic Shores is located in a Navy high noise, so its ability to expand to meet the needs of the residents of the city is limited, if not restricted severely. Another important fact about Westminster is 65%- 70% of the residents who live in Westminster today, were residents of Virginia Beach prior to retiring in that facility. This is,quite frankly,our community's asset for retirement. It's even better so because it's one of the few that offers the full continuum of care and guarantees that continuum of care to the residents as they enter that program literally for the entire the rest of their life. In this case, staff has touched upon the need for this facility and while they touched upon it briefly, I'd like to elaborate a little bit more detail for you because it's an important component of why we're here today. This is not a case of us building something and hoping the public will come. This is a case of us not sticking our head in the sand to what we see or hear and around the country. Today,this is known as a silver tsunami. The college age kids of my years have entered the school system early on and the college system after that, and beyond that, enter the housing market after that worked throughout the United States. And now we're about to enter the retirement communities. Today, Westminster has over 500 people on their waiting list. They are 97% occupied and two other publications have identified Virginia Beach as one of the three most underserved cities in the nation for senior housing. The other two are McAllen, Texas, and Augusta, Georgia. We're identified as one of the three in the nation with the lowest amount of available senior housing. Another important fact if you look at the future here, over the next 20 years is a program called Leading Age that does these studies for the housing industry. Well, over the next 20 years, the age of people in Virginia just alone, between the age of 65 and above, will increase at a rate two and a half times that of people under 65. They're expected to grow literally 40%when the rest of the populations is going to go below 20%during that time period. In addition to that, one of the things you look at for senior housing is where do people retire? And you might know that Virginia Beach is the second largest city in Virginia,where the largest amount of people stays here to retire. Think about it, if you lived in Gloucester, if you lived in some smaller communities around the State, you might not stay there to retire. And maybe a question is your families moved away. It may be that there are no facilities, but Virginia Beach is the second in the state where people stay to retire here. All evidence of the need for the facility and how does this fit to the city's program? In fact, I'll be happy to tell you that the city solved this back in 2004, and they reiterated 10 years later in 2014 with a program the city called, community for a lifetime. We would take care of people as they entered the workforce,we would have a diversified economy, and we would have increased spending for schools and kindergarten education. And we would have retirement facilities so that people,who were born here,lived here,worked here could remain and retire here and why because the retirement age community is one of the most relevant in any city. There are people who have lived here, they've been successful here. They've had families here;they go to church here and synagogues here. So naturally,they would want to stay here. All those resources for mentoring are kept in place. In fact, Westminster Canterbury, interesting fact, last year alone had over 32,000 hours, 32,000 hours of volunteerism throughout the community last year alone, to give you some example. With that kind of a backlog and need and that kind of a city program that recognizes the need for this it should be no surprised that Westminster will be taking the lead and coming forward today with an expansion of their facilities. Then you ask why here, and why this expansion? Why here is also important. One of the factors and what they look for today in this program is to make sure that the units can be affordable to people and you do that through a couple of ways and what they've done here is they focused on property that was immediately contiguous to their campus. And you say, why and the reason is very simple. When you do that, you can leverage your staff, you can leverage your administration, you can leverage your parking that's in place,you can leverage all your maintenance activities,all your infrastructure is right next door. Were they to move elsewhere they'd have to start all that over and carry all that additional overhead independent of existing facilities. That's why it's here. Why is it the size that it is? It's not because we're trying to make a big building. It's because we're trying to meet the need that we see coming. In fact, our own estimates are that even if this is built in five years as we project, it will still be below what the need is for this area by one to 200 units even at that time, and that's not counting the growth that I just mentioned to you. The need is here, they've stepped up in a place which allows them to leverage their facilities, and they've come forward with this beautiful building. There are two buildings here one is an independent living facility. What you're hearing most about it is 22 stories, it encloses 399 structured parking spaces. It has its 22 stories at one portion, the other portion of the building is five stories, I don't want to use too much time because I think virtually everybody has seen this. At least certainly the audience we've been to a number of presentations. There's a portion of this 22-stories, the rest is five stories. We have revamped the access way to the building after talking with staff to reduce impacts on adjacent properties. We have a seven-story building in the back,which is where there are 48 units,memory care and there are 75 units of assisted living, all of which,by the way, are being upgraded. Today, in assisted living they have memory care well under what they need and they're below what the market demands in terms of space, and amenities. It's important to not just build it,but to build it so it meets the needs of the public when they expect to come into this facility. With that, they went on, we had a large outreach program, met with, most importantly met with your BAC, your Bayfront Advisory Commission. We met with them in November, and we did so because that's the body appointed by this board and actually by the council and forgive me to look at applications in that area,provide recommendations and advice. As you may know,they have recommended in this case, they don't make recommendations by the way, what they do is they say we will give you any recommend suggestions or approvals, any problems we have with this application, they did that went through his whole presentation went around the room, and no one had any objections or concerns. And that's reflected in your staff report and that's the body that you look to. The second group we went to is your senior housing committee. This was the group created back by the city years ago. And it consists of many emergency services, people, Planning Department officials, economic development, and others, and went meeting with them. They had suggestions to the building, all of which we implemented, and they have recommended, no problem with this application either. You have your staff, you have your planners, your BAC, and you have your senior housing committee, all of whom are in unison with this application. Now, in addition to that, part of any application is, have you met with neighbors and we have and we know there's opposition. But I'm happy to tell you that we have submitted to you letters and emails from area businessmen, civic leaders, members of the BAC, members of Westminster and something you may not know about,it's called their early advantage members,EA members they are called. These are people who have signed up who want to move in and there's no space yet. They've submitted letters; you have letters from them as well. You have in fact over 50 of letters in support for this application throughout the quarter and I also point out to you that we have a large number of people here today and fortunately for you, I'm not going to ask them to speak, only have two speakers in addition to myself today to make it easier for you. But I did want to ask those people to stand; before I do I want to let you know this. There's a concern in their building, as you might imagine about coronavirus, they had originally 92 people signed up to come today, 64 had been able to make it, the others were just too afraid to get out of this structured situation they're in and come into a very public place. It's just the nature of the day, but I want you to know, that 64 did brave it out here, did come and if you don't mind, I'd like to ask them to stand if I could. Thank you very much. So, in concluding with this, I want you to know that we, in this process met with Traffic, the Fire Department submitted all the things to you, I think you can conclude the following as your staff does. You have an unprecedented need in this community for additional senior housing. You have an applicant with 40 years of experience being successful in that area. You have a property right next door to their campus, and its property they have been buying up slowly over the years with all private funds. There's no public money in this project. This project reduces the traffic from what it would be by right. No matter what we do, and it reduces the impervious area on the property. I know we're concerned about flooding this; we reduced the impervious area on this property and we introduced the first stormwater systems on all three of these parcels. They've never had any stormwater, the campus does,but none of these three parcels have one approval. In addition to that, we're introducing new levels of landscaping and all along both public right-of- way on Ocean Shore, as well as along Starfish, where almost no landscaping exists today. And if I could also, I'm happy to tell you that we almost have no impact on your infrastructure. We have no school aged children. We have lower traffic, and yet we pay amongst the highest taxes of any landowner on Shore Drive. When this is done,the taxes anticipated to go from what they currently are right now $1.1 million by a digit to grow by an additional $2.3 million to over $3 million a year in taxes for a facility that's completely paid for by 100% by private funds, and it has little to no impact on your infrastructure compared to all the other uses that are there, or other uses that could be built in that quarter. We're happy to come to you with staff's recommendation for approval. We're happy that we have a large amount of support throughout the community, can say we've done our best to reach out to opposition and so forth,but it's just the nature of the day. We're here to answer questions. And I'm more than happy to answer questions of the commission members, at your leisure. Mr. Chairman. Any questions for Mr. Nutter. Please stand by. We are going to talk to you again. Mr. Nutter: Yes, sir. No doubt. Ms. Sandloop: Mr. Vice Chair. If I counted correctly, we have 33 speakers. So just a reminder, as I call speakers,you have three minutes unless representing a large group. First speaker is David May, followed by Ted Wirginis, I think Mr. May is maybe outside. David May. Ted Wirginis followed by Mr. McNeil. Mr. Wirginis: Good afternoon. I'm speaking on behalf of,my name is Ted Wirginis. I'm speaking on behalf of my owners on Seashell Road, Bay Breeze Villas. My specific issues are with storm water drainage. I applaud that Westminster Canterbury is actually taking action to do something with stormwater drainage on their side. But when you look at the total of what's being done, I think the city actually needs to do a little bit more for that whole area. And specifically, our property was built in 1986 and since then all the properties around it had been built higher and higher. So it's basically Seashell Road is the low spot. In every heavy rain, it gets flooded. And the city is aware of this and no action has been taken. What I'm afraid of is Westminster Canterbury's addition, although it drains maybe to the west side of them, it's still I think would put some kind of additional impact for the area rounded. So I just oppose this as presented. Mr. Weiner: Any questions? Mr. Horsley: So you say you would like for them to explain to you how they address their storm water and I'm sure with the stormwater regulations that are in effect now they will, I'm sure there will be no offsite water going from Westminster going to the other properties with the new stormwater regulations? Mr. Wirginis: Yeah, we're not against the development, but we're against, there's nothing to be. There's been no stormwater upgrades, at least for 30 years. Mr. Horsley: Stormwater is one of the main things that the city is working on now. So you can rest assured that that most likely will be addressed by the city and this development at this time. Mr. Wirginis: Thank you. Mr. Weiner: Thank you for coming. Ms. Sandloop: Mr. and Ms. McNeil. Mr. McNeil: Good afternoon. My name is Douglas McNeil. I am a second-generation Virginia Beach resident. I'm the President also of the Ocean Shore Condominium Association and I'm here to speak in opposition to this proposed development as outline. First,basically three points. First is about need. There's no doubt a tsunami is coming, but to think that 200 high end retirement units is going to put a dent in the needs of the Virginia Beach residents is false, okay. These units are where they are being built where they are for high end retirees, including possibly myself. Second is the application in my letter, I asked if there could be a wind field study done. The application doesn't have one. No one's done one. Anyone who's watched The Weather Channel, and stood between the hotels at the Oceanfront knows there's a huge wind effect when storms come through. It causes substantial damage and has in the past in our units just between four store units. I really think that that should be mandated as part of the approval and conditions for this is some sort of wind study. And I guess the last thing is that if you view the job of the commission not to deal with parking spaces or whether they're big enough for kennels and stuff like that is to deal with these kinds of things to deal with the neighborhoods that different developments are trying to come into. This can be ongoing, you know, it is, there is more and more pressure to build at the Oceanfront all over the place. And I think that you have to use your best judgment. I'm not telling you to stop this because I've tried to build facilities working for Norfolk Southern for many years, but you have to look at how it can fit into the neighborhood versus making the neighborhood adapt to what they're trying to do and where we have. For me any questions? The only other comment is, I'm not sure the Bayfront Advisory Commission is totally unbiased. Some of the people as noted are on the waiting list. Mr. Weiner: Thank you for your comments. Mr. McNeil: Thank you. Ms. Sandloop: Hi, Mr. May do you wish to speak? Ms. Lauer: Excuse me, my name is Jeanie Lauer. I think Mr. May asked you that, we would like to substitute the order and I speak in advance of him. He's the architect of one of the condominium owners and I am the attorney for one of the condominium Association. Mr. Weiner: Madam Clerk, is her name on the list? Ms. Sandloop: No, I don't have your name on the list. Jamie Lauer. I don't have a card. But it's I mean. Mr. Weiner: Can she come forward and fill out the card. Come and talk and then fill out a card, please. Ms. Lauer: I am here on behalf of the Bayview Villa Condominium Association. I'm the sole representative speaking on their behalf no other individuals will be speaking so I believe I'm the designated sole representative, the time allotted is 10 minutes. Ms. Sandloop: Yes, ma'am. Ms. Lauer: What I want to speak to is a lot of time that my clients and others and myself have invested in reviewing, not only the staff recommendation, but all of the documents that preceded it. We did a FOIA request some time ago and received everything that was being reviewed and considered before the staff recommendation ever came out. When I read the report, and its endorsement, I was surprised not because of what's in it but what's missing and what should make you say this is not an appropriate time to send this matter up to City Council. This is lacking in the things that we require as the Planning Commission and let me start with the design guidelines in the comprehensive plan for Virginia Beach 2016. The report does not identify how you preserve and protect the character of the established neighborhoods, the established neighborhoods, the condominiums, the places that surround there are pretty much unanimously opposed, and there is no consideration of how a 22-story glass building with reflective surfaces and a variety of potential detriments to dunes, wildlife, relocation of the existing beach access easement for people all of those things that hasn't been considered and it's not a portion of the report. It doesn't identify or comport with the design of the comprehensive plan requiring improved land use compatibilities and over commercialization to ensure that the resort-based use is complement rather than dominate this corridor. The goal in the comprehensive plan to achieve the lowest reasonable density for future residential uses that's in the comprehensive plan. This is an anathema when you consider the 22-story building that they want to put up in addition to the other centers, improve public parking and public access to the beach fronts doesn't happen in this case,it's relocated. It's a small amount, and it will continue to tax what is already difficult parking situation on Ocean Shore, on Ocean Shore Drive and Starfish. Provide continued support for storing the health of the Chesapeake Bay and Lynnhaven River was already been identified by some of the other speakers. We don't have wind studies. The solar studies are pictures and don't comport with what are generally considered to be appropriate solar and shadow studies that identify how they affect the environment, especially our dunes. All of those things are missing. What else is missing is compliance with the law, the height that's referred to under Section 904 of the zoning ordinance for the city of Virginia Beach refers to the only height restriction being that related to navigable air, but that's simply untrue. In Section 901 of the Zoning Ordinance and which is for greater specificity, it provides that housing for seniors and disabled persons, which is what this is categorized except other than when it's a principal use and in a B-4 subdivision or B-4 zoning, it is only a conditional use, not a principal use, shall not exceed 165 feet, the towers 250 feet, never even mentioned in the report. Where's the compliance and where's the effort to even educate this commission about these important issues? It's missing. It concerns me that it's not there. And what else concerns me is that you're required to have a fire review. Well,when I look back through the documents that constitute the fire review,the Fire Department doesn't even know that it's a 22- story building, they only cite five-story and the seven-story and even than they don't endorse it. They just say whatever happens it needs to comply with the statewide building code. Not very positive comment on what's going to happen. Go ahead and build a 22-story building that no one has anticipated on part of the emergency services, and then deal with the fallout when those people are injured or can't be rescued because nobody thought about it in advance. It doesn't fit in with the traffic requirements. The study that was done last year didn't even anticipate the thousand new residents or spaces that have been created since then, much less the burgeoning population that's created by this development. The Virginia code Coastal Primary Sand Dunes and Beaches pursuant to 28.2-1400 sec of the code says the commission shall preserve and protect coastal primary sand dunes and beaches and prevent their despoliation and destruction. You don't see anything about how this affects the sand dunes, you don't have any studies, it's right there on the water, something that supposedly we care about in Virginia Beach but it doesn't sound like it's been considered and that's unfortunate. We also have the city code which identifies the standards for use of coastal primary sand dunes. No permanent alteration of or construction upon any coastal primary sand dunes shall take place which would impair the natural functions of the dune, where's the information in your staff report and where's the supporting documentation that tells you how this affects those sand dunes. This city has litigated the issue of access, has litigated the issue of maintaining and having structures that interfere with the quality of those sand dunes. And yet we pay such short shrift when we're looking at a big project that says we're bringing 3 million in taxes, I didn't think that this was the kind of city that did that and I've lived here my whole life. What else is missing? The endorsement of the senior housing Advisory Committee, which is described by your commission as comprised of both city and state staff members that provide input on all senior housing proposals. They were approached by Westminster Canterbury November of 2016, November 19`h to be exact. The only statement in your staff report says that the SHAC notes the need for a lack of available higher end senior living. I was concerned because when I looked at the minutes from the November 19th, meeting, where Westminster Canterbury was there and which is referred to in the staff report, it didn't say that. It said, what about affordable senior housing? When are you going to provide us with information? Here are some of what I think are the salient remarks that the Senior Housing Advisory Commission actually met and having read other staff reports, I'm used to when there's a proposal that's endorsed by the staff seeing a tag line in there that says the senior housing advisory committee has reviewed this proposal and agrees that it's appropriate or agrees with recommendations of staff, but you don't get that because it doesn't exist. They noted in their minutes that information provided on affordability has been vague, confirmation of grants available or lower income applicants or number of affordable units is needed, nothing about high end. Applications for the pre-submittal and the SHAC meetings have been incomplete and submitted very close to the meeting dates. Community Engagement by the applicant has not taken place that was November 19th, 2016. What's missing? Well, in the rush to get this move forward, SHAC didn't get opportunities to consider the information quickly and they noted the absence of community engagement, Ocean Shore Condominiums, which is right next door to the proposed 22 unit tower wasn't consulted or explained to or invited to ask questions until December 17th and that's when they still wanted to be on your agenda for January. That's how much Westminster Canterbury cares about its neighbors. And for some reason, the minutes recite that when Westminster Canterbury presented their plan to the SHAC,they identified once they had bought out and forced out everybody at Casa Del Playa that the last holdout was a 91-year old man simply isn't true. It was a woman. I think she's in her 70s. But I questioned why it was even necessary to make that comment. And the most significant question from the Department of Housing and Neighborhood Preservation, Karen, and I apologize, I'm going to butcher her name Prohead, ask do you offer affordable housing? speak to the criteria. They couldn't. And what you've got in your packet is a lot of fuzzy math. But I will tell you that in addition to the rents, two and three bedrooms that they're predominantly planned for the Independent Living are starting at an advanced fee of$800,000. That's what you have to pay just to be there then you start paying rent too that doesn't fall in the parameters. Mr. Weiner: Any questions, no questions okay. Mr. Wall: Let's see Bayview Condo Association where Bayview, can you explain? Ms. Lauer: Bayview, its Bayview Villa and its three units and it's adjacent. It's across and down a little bit. Mr. Wall: Can you point that out on the map? Ms. Lauer: Oh, it's not and I apologize, I haven't worn my glasses but its right in the Starfish Road and I think that's the parking lot is right there. Mr. Wall: Okay, thank you. Ms. Lauer: Thank you. Mr. Weiner: Thank you. Next speaker. Ms. Sandloop: Okay. David May, followed by Emily Filer. Mr. Weiner: Ma'am, please fill out a card. Mr. Redmond: Mr. Chairman, can I just suggest that if people are going to speak, they fill out a card in advance. I don't know that it's quite proper for some of them jump in the line. Ms. Lauer: I did. Ms. Sandloop: Yeah, she did. It was my error. It was in the bottom. Thank you. I apologize. Ms. Lauer: That's quite alright. Mr. May: Thank you. I'm David May. I'm president of DLM Architects for an architecture firm headquartered right here in Virginia Beach. My experience has been in both low rise and high- rise buildings and what I'm here to address today is the high rise building that is being proposed on the eastern side of the property adjacent to Ocean Shore condominium, which I'm representing Ocean Shore. Ms. Wilson: Mr. May if you could speak up, that would be appreciated by the audience. Mr. May: All right. Is that better? No. All right. How's that? All right. Don't count that against my time available. Specifically, there's a lot of detail that is shown in the applicant's package and the detail that they show is very helpful and analyzing exactly what they do and I analyze buildings,both new buildings, and also existing buildings. One of my clients right now is the West in the town center, 37-story building, and these buildings have unique challenges that are unique to both their location and to their size. And I want to make sure and clear that my client is not against this development taking place. They're just against the size and scope of the development. And we have some good reasons why, we are that way. First is the shading that's been alluded to, but the shading is the shadow that is cast by a 22-story tower, and that shadow will have an impact, an adverse impact on the residents in that particular area, as well as the people that come to enjoy the beach and suddenly find themselves after about 1:30 in the afternoon in the shade of this tower. And so as a consequence, and we find no justification for a 22-story tower simply because under current permits, a 14-story tower is allowed on that site. And when we look at that 14-story building, it mitigates a lot of the complaints, but the question obviously comes about, well, how do we maintain the same number of dwelling units in a much shorter tower? Well,the answer is quite simply as we widen the tower and if you look at the two parcels involved, they show a rectangle that is the footprint of the building, but they only cover about one third of that footprint with this 22-story tower. So merely what we're asking is to lower the height of the tower and increase the base of the tower and so basically, we can maintain the unit count and one of the other things is we're really concerned about is a reflective glass, reflective glass is shown clearly on the drawings from the architect and that creates a huge issue because it doubles the solar load on and there's no solar studies in this location. Noise, we got two concerns about the noise so there'll be created noises coming from the floor. Mr. Weiner: Thank you for your comments. Any questions for Mr. May? Mr. Wall: Does he represent Ocean Shore? Mr. May: Yes. Mr. Weiner: You represent? Mr. May: Ocean Shores Condominiums. Ms. Sandloop: They have many speakers. Mr. Tajan: I believe they have multiple speakers; he is not representing the group. Mr. Weiner: Oh, you are not representing the group, there are multiple speakers, any questions for Mr. May? Thank you. Ms. Sandloop: Okay. Emily Filer, followed by Todd Solomon. Mr. May: Thank you. Ms. Sandloop: Thank you. Mr. Weiner: Welcome. Ms. Filer: Good afternoon members of the Virginia Beach Planning Commission. Thank you for the opportunity to speak in support of Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay's application to expand our campus. My name is Emily Harkins Filer. I'm a five-year resident at Westminster, Canterbury, and I agree with a speaker who's coming, living there is one of the best decisions I have ever made. I'm also a former chair of the Virginia Beach Mayor's Commission on Aging, an eight-year former member of the Board of Trustees of Westminster, Canterbury, and retired founder of a nationally recognized nonprofit Lease Friends. Presently, I serve as the vice president of the Westminster Canterbury Residents Association. I am well qualified to speak before the commission because of my professional and volunteer background and my residency at Westminster Canterbury. Westminster Canterbury continues to be one of the best life plan communities in this country. I don't know whether you know that. And I enthusiastically support his proposed plans for the future Independent Living apartment building, and assisted living and memory residences. As a volunteer in the healthcare and assisted living areas of our community, I know how important the need is for these buildings. Independent research shows there is a looming shortage of senior housing. In a study published last year, it listed Virginia Beach as one of the top three metropolitan areas in the nation with the greatest unmet future need for senior housing. Let's address the senior housing shortage before it becomes a crisis. Westminster Canterbury wants to be part of the solution at no cost to taxpayers. Westminster Canterbury is my home, as a proud resident of Shore Drive for the rest of my life. Somehow people have excluded me as if I do not count. Yet in addition to me, there are more than 650 of us living at 3100 Shore Drive. I love everything about this truly caring place. I feel safe, cared for with excellent programs, a wide array of services and beautiful residences. I want more people from Virginia Beach and Hampton Roads to have the option to live in this wonderful community. The views are icing on the cake. We have earned your trust, please let us meet the needs of our community, people who will be aging and want to come to Westminster Canterbury should be able to do so. Thank you for your time. Mr. Weiner: Thank you. Any questions? Thank you. Ms. Sandloop: Todd Solomon, followed by John Wolfe. Mr. Solomon: Good afternoon commission members. My name is Todd Solomon. I'm here representing the Shore Drive community coalition. In February, the coalition voted to oppose and ask you to deny this application specifically based on its violations of the Shore Drive quarter overlay density requirements and the building business 901 height requirements which were mentioned earlier. The property here, it's not a request against senior living. It's a request against density, excessive density for the last 20 years that Shore Drive community coalition has been in existence. We've been here at least a dozen times, talking about high density multifamily developments on Shore Drive. Unfortunately,we've lost almost all of them,you've approved them, but you've done so within the code requirements, the density requirements, 24 units per acre, 36 units per anything over four acres. We tried to knock those down, but everything that you see going up now,next to the Lesner Bridge,the overture next to the Great Neck bridge,the apartments they are all built within the read density requirements. This project; however, exceeds the density requirements by 250%, 250%, not 20% or 25%. It's unheard of the height violates your 165 rule for senior housing by 50%. It's going to be the second tallest structure in Virginia Beach next to the Western Town Center and to and behold the code for the developments at Town Center restricted to 200 feet. This is 50 feet more than you're allowed to at the Town Center. And it's also 50 feet larger than you can do at the Oceanfront, which is 200 feet. This will definitely be an iconic structure that is for sure. And if you look in your comprehensive plan and search on the word iconic,it only comes up once and it comes up in the Town Center Pembroke area as an iconic Skyline, which is high rise development. So, this project not only that your comprehensive plan also requires you to have this specific neighborhood and Shore Drive to be a suburban neighborhood aspect. This multi-use high density high rise is urban, and it is definitely not a neighborhood concept. By all accounts, there's no way that you could be approving this. We request again, not saying don't build anything there, but if you could at least factor in the codes that you are responsible for overseeing into this project, is what we've been pushing forever and ever. And oh, by the way, there is another one two years ago you approved for a senior housing development on Shore Drive, next to Taste Unlimited, called New Millennium. That is six acres and 204 units, and to and behold, it falls in the 36 requirement. Mr. Weiner: Any questions? Thank you. Ms. Sandloop: John Wolfe, followed by Jamie Forest. Mr. Wolfe: Honorable members of the Planning Commission. My name is John Wolfe. I reside at 3100 Shore Drive, Virginia Beach, which is also known as Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay. As President of our residents Association, I can say with confidence that we have the enthusiastic support of our residents for our expansion plans as presented to you. However, I feel it is important to provide a little perspective for this proposed expansion. Forty years ago, a group of visionary Virginia Beach citizens saw the need for a secure and attractive retirement community to meet the needs of aging seniors and their health care requirements. They worked diligently and met that challenge and the first phase of Westminster Canterbury was built. Twenty years ago, the need again became apparent and a dedicated group of people stepped up to enable expansion of our campus and I'm glad they did because that's where my wife and I live. Today, the need is again before us. Currently Virginia Beach is identified as you've heard as one of the three metropolitan areas of the United States with the largest unmet need for senior housing. In the next 10 years, the population needing this type of service will grow by 50% according to forecasts. I believe it is time for our generation to meet the challenge of providing additional first- class senior housing along with state-of-the-art medical facilities for an aging population. The plans you have before you today represent a major step in meeting those needs. My wife and I have lived at Westminster Canterbury for almost five years and we feel is one of the best decisions we ever made. We are engaged every day, socially, physically and culturally, through a great variety of enrichment programming. We also have the security that a life plan community affords. Hopefully this opportunity can be available to our friends and neighbors at the most affordable prices possible, increasing the size of our campus,to the extent proposed is an important step. Our community is a valuable contributor to the city,paying over$1 million in property taxes and using very few services, but more importantly, we give back to our city in many other ways, through thousands of hours of volunteer community service. We know we are good neighbors, and responsible members of Virginia Beach. Thank you, we appreciate you and we hope for your yes vote. Thank you. Mr. Weiner: Any questions? Mr. Redmond: Excuse me sir, what was your name sir? Mr. Wolfe: John Wolfe. Mr. Redmond: Mr. Wolfe, thank you. Ms. Sandloop: Tom Forest to be followed by Jamie Forest. Mr. Forest: Good afternoon. My name is Tom Forest. I'm an owner at Ocean Shore condos next door to Lynnhaven Fish House property, now owned by Westminster. Much to the dismay of my condo neighbors and neighbors and surrounding condos, I'm going to take a different approach and perhaps unpopular approach in my limited time. Let me state for the record that I'm opposed to Westminster Canterbury expansion as currently proposed. I have some questions which I don't believe you'll be able to answer and some statements for your consideration. As opposed to some of the statements of concern you'll hear today, we can't use feelings, emotions or other psychological analysis to just as justification to protest change, change stinks,and people are naturally resistant to it. I've worked as a change management consultant for both KPMG consulting and Deloitte Consulting. I have years of experience dealing with resistance to change and facts and regulations matter. This is not about the current residents, Westminster residents that are here that have no stake in this in terms of their future. It's not about Westminster trying to take on the impending increase of senior citizens and the 92 people that they cited that were interested in coming here. Well, that's probably because they don't work full time and the other people that are opposed to this are working full time that's why they can't be here. This is also not about the Vibe as one person recently said on TV, since that can't be quantified and can certainly mean different things to different people. It's about existing building regulations has been cited, particularly as it relates to acreage. Even if the concession to the business district section 901 is agreed upon by the city and Westminster and the building is reduced to 165 feet or 14 stories, the project may still be moot given a small footprint where the high rise is to be located in order to adhere to the Shore Drive corridor overlay section 1704 density requirements of maximum 24 units per acre. The Planning Commission notification letter is a great example with a little map on it, if you examine the acreage for the existing Westminster buildings regarding density and compare it to the recently acquired properties,so the question is,after the final addition the adjacent properties to the existing Westminster campus, will it be combined acreage in accordance with the density restrictions. Starfish Road has also not been addressed sufficiently before construction begins and the volume of residents and staff increases after the new buildings are completed, Starfish needs improvements at the intersection Shore Drive, there are no visible painted lines for vehicles and intend to go either straight or left when facing south, which often admits vehicles from taking a right turn on red and there are also parking spots if it's close to 34 feet from the stop line. So the two cars lined up to go straight or left prevent cars from taking right turn because the west side right-of-way, it's 24 and a half feet, I suggest looking at expanding the width of Starfish. Mr. Weiner: Thank you, any question for Mr. Forest? Thank you sir. Ms. Sandloop: Jamie Forest, followed by Roland Davis. Mr. Forest: Am I able to speak for my wife who's sitting right there? If she's not. Mr. Weiner: She doesn't want to come up. Mr. Forest: No, she's on a machine, she has prepared notes. Mr. Weiner: Sure, sure. Her name is on the list. Right. She has the card. Mr. Forest: In response to the staff, it was in the staff report, I noted that what is the Shore Drive coalition of civic leagues cited in that report,no such organization exists, assuming the staff planner meant the Short Drive Community coalition. The first official discussion by Westminster reps was at the February meeting, not November as was cited in the report. In reference to the comprehensive plans vision for the suburban areas Bayfront Community per the staff recommendation for approval, how is a 22-story glass building consistent with the current aesthetics when the existing Westminster buildings are all brick, and no other waterfront property remote is mostly glass. In reference to the Shore Drive corridor plan, how can this construction approval be in conformance with the plan, yet not be in accordance with a Shore Drive quarter overlay section 1704 density requirements up to maximum 24 units per acre. It was stated in the approval recommendation that Westminster met with some condo association residents mid- November,but met with Ocean Shore Condo residents on December 17th were immediately next door less than 30 days before the original Planning Commission meeting was scheduled for January 8th. And just before the holidays, since we were among the most impacted by the final design, this certainly gives the appearance that Westminster was trying an end around without vetting with their closest neighbors. Thankfully, this topic was delayed until today to give us a chance to analyze our proposal more carefully. I hope you give the facts full consideration, reevaluate the staff recommendation, given the inconsistencies. And one final note, one neighbor who was unable to attend this meeting, lives in a condo nearby is a firefighter and he has grave concerns about an attempt to get residents that will need assistance down 22 flights of stairs as Mr. Coston I'm sure could appreciate. This has become more of a safety issue as well. I can also state that I used to work in Dominion tower years ago during my consulting days, and they had regular fire drills. And I walked down from the 22nd floor down to the first floor and while at that time, I'd been working out more carefully. It was not an easy task at the end of the day. If you can imagine trying to get senior citizens who may not have the ability to get down 22 flights of stairs that could be problematic and can be very dangerous. Thank you. Mr. Weiner: Any questions for Mr. Forest? Thank you. Ms. Sandloop: Roland Davis followed by Holly Cronauer. Mr. Davis: I have presentation slides for you all, I would offer to put it up there. Mr. Weiner: That's fine. Closer to the mic sir, please. Mr. Davis: I'd like to have it passed out first. The only thing I've learned today is I'm part of the Silver Tsunami. I might as well start using just for men hair coloring. Mr. Redmond: Let me know how it works. Mr. Davis: My name is Roland Davis. I have lived and had a second home on Shore Drive on the bay for 25 years. First slide is this will become the third tallest building in the city of Virginia Beach. And to everybody in the audience imagine going out your back-door back deck and find the Armada Hoffler Tower next to your house. The second slide is the third tallest building is the Hilton on 31 st Street. That was 140 feet from the seawall over 400-foot beach 100% commercial was being proposed on the third slide the day will be 40 feet from the Bay wall, less than 200 foot beach and 100% residential area. The fourth slide shows the shade that is going to extend well beyond just the immediate area,but extensively down the beach. The length of that shadow is not known because the study doesn't show the length of those shadows. The fifth slide is the suggestion of moving the tower to the West End. If you move the tower to the west side that will result in minimal shade to the adjacent neighborhoods and avoids the public beach shading. It's also zoning best practices and that's step-down zoning and transition zoning. The last slide shows exactly the dimensions in their site plan that the tower can be moved to that Westside,it eliminates the shading conflict, and it maintains the transition down zoning concepts, it also fire access to both sides of the building, not just one. On the last slide, my suggestions and independent sun and shadow study you have a two-page document of what that exactly should be. It should be like a real estate appraisal; it should be independent. A comparative repositioning of the concept for the fair decision if you're going to adjudicate this, know the options, review with the city attorney's office to ensure the city's future liability, a one mile notification to the residence, not just the adjacent I live 1500 feet down the beach. I didn't receive anything in the mail and a report on step down zoning best practices with the American Planning Association. Mr. Weiner: Mr. Davis, thank you very much. Any comments to Mr. Davis? Ms. Sandloop: Thank you. Mr. Davis: Thank you. Ms. Sandloop: Holly Cronauer, followed by Fred Levitin. Mr. Cronauer: Good afternoon, members of the Commission. My name is Holly Cronauer. I'm a resident of Ocean Shore and a board member at Ocean Shore and I'll use a couple of seconds to ask the Ocean Shore residents to stand to demonstrate to you that we have a significant interest in this situation. Thank you. Westminster Canterbury is a nationally recognized institution we all recognize that. Likewise, the communities that surround Westminster Canterbury are regionally recognized and are home to significant number of residents of Virginia Beach. Westminster and the residents that surround Westminster have coexisted for a large number of years. However, I submit to you that that the harmony between Westminster and the residents of surround Westminster has deteriorated over the years,particularly as Westminster has expanded. Now we're proposing another giant expansion. I have numerous concerns with this expansion. I don't have time to address them all. I sent information letters to each member seated here as well as to all the members on the counsel. I want to address one issue today in my limited amount of time. Parking. It's already been discussed by a number of people. Parking is an issue at Westminster today. If you go to Westminster, any day, any working day, their parking lot is full right now. They have numerous activities, visitors and whatnot. Parking is a problem today. The report cites ratios based upon units and owners. It now addresses how many spaces they're going to increase. What the report does not address, even in Westminster's own opinion is whether that parking is going to be adequate? It just bases it upon a ratio of spaces to owners. I submit to you that's a question that you need to research. You know,is the parking that is being proposed,just for their units adequate. Parking in the tower does it consider their staff? Here again, it sites a ratio based upon units and owners there, the staff is going to increase. So, you know, I ask you to take a look at that. What's the plan for the pavilion? Is the pavilion going to be an increase in activities that's going to bring visitors into there and is that going to increase the parking requirements? Has that been considered? I ask you to take a look at that. Parking is a concern for everybody that lives in the area. Mr. Weiner: Sir. Thank you very much for your comments. Thumbs up, any questions? Ms. Sandloop: Thank you. Mr. Weiner: Thank you. Ms. Sandloop: Fred Levitin, followed by J. Friedman. Mr. Levitin: Good morning. Thank you for your good work that you all do. I have some personal things that I'd like to address. One is when they do their pile driving to put in this monstrosity of a building. What effect is it going to have on the construction of my condo which is adjacent to it? I live in Ocean Shore condominiums. That's a very big concern to me. Also, they are moving a public access road or public access lane. That is between the fish house and La Playa over to be adjacent to our property. We already have a public access on our east side. Now we're going to have public access on the east and west side, which I think is unfair, because it just crowds our beach. Essentially, it's going to give them a public beach, a private beach. When they're doing their building, I don't know if they're going to address this or not, but we have prevalent winds Northeast, Northwest constantly all the time. And when they're building this thing, if it's going up 22 stories, what about flying debris that we have to put up with and how they're going to take care of those. Also, I'm in agreement with past people that have talked that this should be downscaled. It should be in brick instead of glass like the rest of their units and in conjunction with the environment of Shore Drive, there are no glass buildings on Shore Drive, they are either concrete or brick and it should be that way. It also would be a good idea if they flip flop these things so that it would not be so much of a concern about wind and shadow on our condominiums. Thank you. Mr. Weiner: Thank you sir. Any questions? Thank you. Ms. Sandloop: Jay Friedman, followed by Celia Friedman. Mr. Friedman: Hi, I'm Jay Friedman. I live in Ocean Shore Condos. Upon reading the planning staff s recommendation for the approval of the project, they based it upon being consistent with the Virginia Beach comprehensive plan. I cannot agree with the same assessment because when I look at the Virginia Beach's comprehensive plans vision for the suburban area, Bayfront community, it's to protect the character, economic value and aesthetic quality of established neighborhoods and that is the opposite of what this project is going to do to the neighborhood. As you've been hearing,this will be the tallest building currently in Shore Drive corridor by 16 stories. It will be totally out of character with our neighborhood. As you've heard, it's going to be the second, it will be the tallest building outside of Town Center and they want to make an iconic building, it will be because you're going to be able to see it in the entire city. We're a residential neighborhood, you don't put an iconic building in a residential neighborhood, and it just doesn't fit. I've been to the city of Houston a number of times; they don't have zoning. If they have a piece of land, they can put a building up a 50-story building at a residential neighborhood and nobody can stop it. And that just totally destroys the neighborhood and that's what's going to happen here. If you allow this what's next, 30 stories, 40 stories. It opens a can of worms for our quiet neighborhood. Second, by having this tall monstrosity of a building, it would be virtually impossible for our property values to go up. They say they're going to get $3 million of property taxes, how about the decrease of our property taxes, because of what we're going to have to be living with. All of the negative aspects of the new buildings are being focused away from their buildings. It's in their report to the detriment of the neighborhood property,neighboring properties. A project of this magnitude should not be allowed the force in neighborhoods received the brunt of all problems during and after construction. They could move some of the noise over to their side instead of on ours or even the trash areas. The third vision, aesthetic quality of established neighborhoods, how can that be when the neighborhood just changed from residential this big corporate looking building that's going to congest our roads, change our beaches, alter the ecological system,hurt our property values and change the way of life that all of us enjoy by living in this Shore Drive corridor. In summary,due to the height of the building and the location services needed for the building, this commission should reject the proposal and request changes that are neighborhood friendly. Mr. Weiner: Any comments for Mr. Friedman? Thank you. Ms. Sandloop: Celia Friedman, followed by Lisa Leidig. Ms. Friedman: Hi, my name is Celia Friedman. I've been a lifelong resident of the Hampton Roads area and have been a citizen of Virginia Beach for the last 38 years by choice because of her standards of living. I'm also a resident of Ocean Shore condominiums. Today you'll hear many accounts to the opposition of the proposed plans for Westminster Canterbury to build the 22-story tower on the Chesapeake Bay. They even call this a landmark for our city, but this is a private facility with amenities available only to their residents and their guests. The plans as currently proposed benefit only the privileged few. Westminster Canterbury's only concern is for the beautification of the facility, and not the lives and standard of living that we chose for DBH to live of their neighbors in the Shore Drive corridor. With modifications to their plans,I would hope the city, the corporation of Westminster Canterbury, and the end of Shore Drive, can find a plan that benefits and is pleasurable to all not just a few. And let me just say, this home that I'm living in now is my dream home too and I want to keep it my dream home. Mr. Weiner: Thank you, any questions. Thank you. Ms. Sandloop: Lisa Leidig followed by Greg Kunsch. Ms. Leidig: Good afternoon. My name is Lisa Leidig. I live on Starfish Road 2312 and this was important enough for me that I actually took off work. I didn't get to catch a bus. The beach access, all right, this current beach access from Starfish Road I have been using for the last 27 years. I use it all year round. It's beautiful. It's convenient and it's also publicly owned. Let's just make that clear. Westminster Canterbury does not own that strip of land between the Fish House and Casa De Playa,by them moving that access over to the west side of Ocean Shores that's going to create a private beach for them of approximately four tenths of a mile because the next access is that clean street. And I say it's going to create private beach access because I've lived there for a while. Every time, we have northeast, steady northeast winds or a high tide, the waves are in the water is pushed up under to the point that you cannot get under the Fish House. Also, they are retaining the public beach access stairwell from the sea wall down to the beach in effect going from a public beach access to now a private beach access. There is also HRT runs a bus line at route 35, runs during the summer from May to September. That drop off is right there in front of Westminster Canterbury for the express use of residents and visitors to use the public beach. How are they going to get there? If the Starfish access is closed, there is precedent to keeping public beach access public. There was just a case in North Carolina that they wanted it to be private and it was denied in court. Also, the Surf Rider Foundation back in 2011, said that existing public coastal access opportunities must be retained new or increased public access opportunities should be provided, and development must not be allowed to interfere with public access. The public should be afforded full and fair access to beaches, which are public trust resources by minimizing the possibility of impediment,including development subdivision or land use zoning changes. So what I'm asking you to do is to make Westminster do what everybody else is required to do in the city and that is stick to the restrictions, stick to only their property and build something that the community wants. I personally want all of you to vote in denial of this request. Thank you, if you have any questions. Mr. Weiner: Thank you, ma'am. Ms. Sandloop: Thank you. Greg Kunsch, followed by Steven Annunziato. Mr. Kunsch: Well, my name is Greg Kunsch. I actually live in Witchduck area. I've been here for 35 years and I call Shore Drive a quarter of my home. Actually, I call all of Virginia Beach my home. I think of it as a community,right? This is a community. What are the different areas? Right? I think of the Ocean Front, the big skyscrapers,right? That's cool. That's what we expect, I do expect the shadows down there, expect my view to be blocked,right? We got the north end, right. And then I got Shore Drive, Shore Drive is a local's only guys. That's why we set up the whole Shore Drive, corridor, condominium association, all that stuff I'm not a legal guy. I'm just a normal guy trying to enjoy the community. I'm concerned, right; you guys should be concerned about it's really happening for the long term. Do I want more big buildings along Shore Drive, shoot skyscrapers? I hear about community from Westminster, right? If they were doing an expansion, what would you normally expect; I would expect the kind of same size building, an extra wing to be proposed, right? I wouldn't expect like a campus proposal with another huge tower, this big on the other end, I'd expect a little expansion, a wing, yep. Maybe something low, some sort of way of keeping some public access to that beach and making it more normal, like it was supposed to be for the common man. Right? It's what we would expect. I would ask that the council look at what they're proposing. We've heard a number of different ways through laws, through procedures,right? But also just through common sense,right? Why not relocate the tower to the other side? Why did they push it over here? Why don't make it the same size, make it a little extension, same size, the shadow effects go down, the wind issues go down, right, and we can actually kind of enjoy everything, right? That sounds like community to me. That's really what I'm asking Westminster and the council to kind of enforce right, is that community approach. We've all got to live there. Once it's built, it's done and we're there for the next 50 years. Is that really where we want to be in 50 years? More of these towers, I don't think so. Thank you. That was my thoughts. Mr. Weiner: Any questions? Thank you, sir. Mr. Kunsch: Okay, thank you. Ms. Sandloop: Steven Annunziato followed by Patricia Kalellis. Mr. Annunziato: Members, thank you very much for your time. Recently, I am a new Virginia Beach resident moved here a couple of years ago, immediately asked the city to be involved in the city because I do love it. We've been vacationing here for years. I sent a letter to you with regard to a different issue that I think is actually quite an imperative. It has to do with the viability, so the basic context that you've been given is that this is needed that there is a need for skilled nursing facility and for those residences. The letter that I sent you showed actually an independent research study that basically said that there's an erosion in that need, all right, that there is a need maybe in the affordable segment, but actually, if you did receive the report that I sent you from Merrill Lynch, it had cited that there is an erosion in this area, and this extreme current concern in the economic community, about the viability of these type of foundations where you build these type of developments, and you float a lot of bonds, and then it destabilizes the environment. You may recall, if you had the opportunity to read that letter, one of the concerns I had for is the over extension so Westminster has a right to build. The question is when coming to the city and asking the city for the ability to extend and to build beyond what is acceptable. There's an obligation then for the City Planning Commission and the city to look at this and determine is this appropriate? And my question to you is considering the timing of the economic cycle, considering the issues facing and the possible recession coming out of COVID-19, which we know is about to occur. We're seeing a great slowdown in the economy. What is the impact if we have a large expansion, not only to Westminster, but you have to consider the other skilled nursing facilities, because if you have an overbuild here, you have a burden on the other facilities and their viability, you're creating a vacuum. And I warn you to consider that very carefully in your consideration for this extensive expansion. Any questions? Mr. Weiner: Thank you, sir. Mr. Annunziato: Thank you very much. Ms. Sandloop: Thank you. Patricia Kalellis followed by Robert Perrine. Ms. Kalellis: Hello, I'm Patricia Kalellis and I live at Ocean Shore Condos. On March 10th of this year, my husband and I've been living here for one year, having traveled to Virginia Beach many years over the decades actually to be with family so we're well familiar with the area. We moved into Ocean Shore after looking in many different locations because it was,we moved from New Jersey and for us, it became our forever home. My husband is older and I am a recovering cancer patient and the two of us found that the piece of the area that we were moving into was going to be delightful. And we were quite appalled by the commotion that will come with the building of this. We survived a construction site of 60 condos right next to our home in New Jersey and there's a lot of days where your paintings are, they need to be straightened your house shakes, you worry about foundation cracks and we're worried about the construction of the condos around us. We had a situation where 14 acres of woods was ripped out and in that we lost the ability of our vinyl siding which was quite sturdy, it was melted and it melted because when the sun hit the glass on our French doors, it melted our materials. It melted some of our roof shingles. So I believe that our beautiful condos which are beautifully constructed out of brick and newly roofed at great expense will also be impacted. During that construction, we had a huge amount of dust and a huge amount of grit that settled onto the house. We needed many power washings. What I'm saying is be mindful of the impact of this on the people on our housing, and the value of our homes and the air that we're going to breathe that we came down here to breathe. Thank you. Mr. Weiner: Thank you, any comments or questions? Thank you, ma'am. Ms. Sandloop: Robert Perrine, followed by Tina Bonner. Mr. Perrine: Good afternoon. I'm Bob Perrine from Chesapeake Bay Shores. Everything you've heard is basically not in opposition to the building of these and expansion is basically how it's being built. I worked for Curve Engineering for 35 years and I was in-charge of the planning when we approached somebody in, it was the basically, we built mess halls and barracks and we approached the commander with our planning documents. Basically they were spread out maybe two or three different plans and they had to say, well, we like this or we like that, but when we went to the meeting,back in the 8th February a dockside, we were given a definitive design. And so the comments from the people there had to be defended because there was only one design and you've heard the different arguments about this design and I would like to add something, one is the traffic flow, they propose to have the entrance up the public access road and the exit on their private property at egress exit and you know there's no reason they couldn't have the traffic flow in their private for entrance and exit. The other thing that was brought up is the public access to the beach, they want to move it over, and there's no reason that it can't be where it is. It basically could be around and over what they're building. There's no reason to really move it but if it is moved, then that means that the public access people would have to go under the pier. And one of the problems with that is that if they don't do something to the pier, we recommended that going under the pier is very dangerous. Because right now, we said that it's falling apart, and people walking under, really afraid to walk under it. And they said, the people there said, well, we'll fix it right away. Well, here's a picture of. Mr. Weiner: Sir, thank you for your comments. Any questions for the speaker. Thank you, sir. Mr. Perrine: Thank you. Ms. Sandloop: Thank you. Mr. Weiner: Sir, would you mind providing that picture since you should, during the hearing? Thank you. Next speaker. Ms. Sandloop: Tina Bonner, followed by Richard Miles. Ms. Bonner: I drove all the way down from Richmond and luckily I work for my husband so I could take the day off, but I actually wanted we've lived off Shore Drive for 30 years now. And I've actually wanted to be a part to see how things got built in the Shore Drive Area. And this is just I am against this building is just a passion play because I think I went over the edge when they built up the Lesner Bridge and the inlet and Great Neck Road where we have 236 apartments that means two cars each, we're going to have 500 cars out on Great Neck Road. I just don't know how these things get approved. So I thank the people that represent me with all the facts from Shore Drive, but it's a personal play that, you know, now it takes 5 to 10 minutes for me to get out on Shore Drive, and I can just imagine what the future holds,but I'm not Greta Thornburg,but please where's the water coming from? Where's the sewage going to? I mean, it's, and it's sad,just think twice about this. Mr. Weiner: Any questions? Ms. Sandloop: Thank you. Richard Miles followed by Paul Terkeltaub. Mr. Miles: Good afternoon my name is Richard Miles and I live in the Ocean Shore condominium community. My major concern about this project is the placement of the tower and garage. Now, why would someone want to be on the Planning Commission? It's not for the huge salary that you get and all the grief okay, I would hope that one of the reasons would be to minimize the impact of such a massive commercial project like this, that sits in the middle of a residential neighborhood. Please allow me to read the letter that I sent to each of you to refresh your memory. The $400 million project that is on your agenda today is"The largest private capital investment in the city's history." The present plan looks great if it were on an island, but as it stands now, it's right in our face in Ocean Shore. I lived in Ocean Shore condominiums, it's December of 1999. I've suffered under previous Westminster Canterbury construction projects. This proposed project would dwarf all previous projects. It is projected to take years to complete, I think it's four or five. Imagine if Godzilla were to come here from Japan and begin stomping and raging six or seven days a week for 8 to 10 hours a day for years while being in your backyard. Then at the end of his rampage, he decides to stay in the form of a massive statue 22 story with his backside facing your home, I am not talking about shutting down the project, I'm pleading with Westminster to adjust it to lessen the footprint and impact of the neighborhood,my neighbors will be talking to you their concerns,I personally would like to concentrate on the positioning of the tower and garage. Please take the time to obtain the colorful beautiful rendition of the proposed 22 story tower with attached garage with titled the design. In addition, please obtain the noticing; please obtain the conceptual master plan for Westminster Canterbury, while noticing the faint images of Ocean Shore condos and their proximity to the tower. While you were taking all this in, please visualize if the tower and garage were flip flop as discussed before, the first thing that occurred to you is that now the tower Godzilla is more centered in the Westminster property and further away from the Ocean Shore condominiums. If Westminster would make this somewhat major concession to flip flop the tower and garage, it would go a long way to truly prove their intention to be a good neighbor. This project is going to be here for generations and what is done now will be a reflection on Westminster Canterbury, the Planning Commission and most of all the current members of the city council. Thank you so much. My wife could not be here. Can I please have you all pass this around. Thank you. Mr. Weiner: Thank you, sir. Ms. Sandloop: Paul Terkeltaub and Mary Sykes. Mr. Terkeltaub: My name is Paul Terkeltaub. My wife and I are owners at Ocean Shore Condominium, and we've lived there for 10 years now. We've been in Virginia Beach for 40 years, our big move was from Norfolk prior to that, so we are definitely local residents. I'm sorry that I'm having to come here to address you today on this matter, and I'm equally sorry that I understand the city has been working on this for over a year with Westminster Canterbury, and nobody other than the city and Westminster Canterbury has been consulted. We live right next door and we were never brought into this discussion. I know Mr. Nutter was pleased that you've been working with him for a year. I'm not so pleased if we had been brought in; I don't think there would be these problems right now that you're going to be subjected to. Quite a few of the neighbors have already addressed many of these issues, so I'm not going to be redundant in those factors, but we are here today, begging you to protect really our life savings because many of us spent a lot of money on our condos and with one development, one fell swoop, there's the chance that we will wipe out a great deal of the wealth of the condos right next door to Westminster Canterbury. Once again, we're not opposing this development; we're just looking for modifications instead of a 22- story building made out of glass, maybe we look at the 14 stories made out of brick to blend in with the current structures that they have on their property. You know, if Westminster's allowed to move forward with this, they say they have produced a solar study, they say they produced a shadow study. They are not solar studies and shadow studies, as mentioned before, the wind study is imperative. The other thing that I will tell you that is woefully inadequate, it's been addressed once but I'm going to do it a little different way is the parking garage. The parking garage is nowhere near large enough to handle all of the population,the workers, visitors, etc,that are going to be there. One other issue that they didn't mention is that the parking garage is built on an 8% grade. If you don't know when an 8% grade is in a parking garage, please go down to the PNC building in Norfolk, Virginia off of St. Paul's drive into that building, when you enter that parking garage, you're at such a slope that you can't see over the first hump when you get in there. Now, if you're fortunate enough to have your parents still alive, if you feel comfortable driving in that type of garage, have your parents drive in that type of garage and see how well that works out. We're talking 70-80-year-old people that are going to be driving, it's totally inappropriate for the way this was designed. You know, my wife and I are in our 60s. In the last eight years, my wife has had a stroke and I've had to give up my career because I've been diagnosed with mild cognitive impairment, a form of dementia and so it's nice and the point being in saying that is it's nice that Westminster Canterbury says they're there for everybody. My wife and I financially can afford to go into Westminster Canterbury; they will not take us because of our health. So you have to be healthy and wealthy to get into Westminster Canterbury. One doesn't make it for you. Mr. Weiner: Thank you for your comments. Mr. Terkeltaub: Thank you. Mr. Weiner: Any questions? Mary Sykes followed by Marina Liacouras. Ms. Sykes: Good afternoon. I'm Mary Sykes. I own and live at 2428 Ocean Shore Crescent and I have been there for the past 15 years. The proposed WC plan as presented should be denied. It is not compatible with existing communities, modifications and height, size, density, location and materials are necessary. The proposed WC plan places the 22-story reflective glass building to the far east of their property, which puts it immediately adjacent to Ocean Shore condos with every negative noisy function right next to our community, the service road, the loading dock, the delivery trucks, the garbage recycling trucks, all with the constant beep, beep, beep that comes with those functions. The fire suppression room, the water rooms that will have pumps to force water up 22 stories,our ability to enjoy our homes will be forever negatively impacted. WC doesn't care. It wants everything negative about this project far away from the existing campus as possible and pushed into the face of the surrounding communities. I'm one of the 500 or so that WC quotes to be on their waiting list, I deposited the required thousand dollars about five years ago and therefore get information from WC and they refer to me as an extended family member. That's kind of a joke. I just received a letter two weeks ago telling me about the wonderful expansion project. The second paragraph of the letter says at all and I quote, "the best news is this potential construction of these new residences will occur to the east of the existing campus." This will minimize any impact on the existing campus, all residents and team members. I will editorialize and add and blank all of the immediately adjacent communities, you can fill in what goes in the blank. WC should be required to move the location of the tower toward WC existing campus and away from OS property line to give us reasonable separation between the WC tower and Ocean Shore condo buildings. This will help reduce the impact of negativity effective winds on Ocean Shore buildings,reduce the noise level that will affect Ocean Shore owners and reduce the negative impact on your Ocean Shore property values. I'm 76 years old and a cancer survivor like my home is my biggest investment. WC has demonstrated does not care that it destroys the quality of life and negatively impacts the net worth of its neighbors. It's a big business. Neither regard for, has no regard for or consideration of others. My question is, is the city the same as WC or what consider the citizens have value and vote to deny this proposal as presented and require WC to make changes to its plan, compatible with the community we share, thank you. Mr. Weiner: Any questions, thank you ma'am. Ms. Sandloop: Marina Liacouras, followed by Peter Scott. Ms. Liacouras: Good afternoon commissioners. My name is Marina Liacouras. I am a resident of Ships Watch, which is the community immediately to the east of Ocean Shore on Ocean Shore Drive, and I am the president of the Condominium Association for Ships Watch. My request is that you condition your decision on this project to ensure that it maintains the character of the community that surrounds it, right now it doesn't. You have before you in this decision two precedent setting issues. First, the 22-story tower in a community of primarily less than 10 story condominium communities, and second the two private walkways across the public streets. Neither of these are compatible with the character, economic value and aesthetic quality of the Shore Drive community that's committed to by the city in the comprehensive plan,the Shore Drive overlay corridor district and the design requirements implementing it. Your CUP criteria that you're supposed to impose, evaluating this decision requires that you consider the compatibility with the neighborhood in which the project is located in terms of existing land uses and proposed new uses. And I request that you do that here. What WC calls an iconic landmark is actually a building of size and material that's totally out of sync with the existing community. A 14-story brick building would be much more appropriate. You should consider the fact that and encroachment agreement is going to be required temporarily for the pedestrian walkways,followed by a lease of airspace, according to the report that says that's what your city attorney required. If you approve that and you approve the 22-story tower, you're opening the door for precedent that we have no idea where it will end. And you should really consider that before you make your decisions here. Also, this expansion is located in a very environmentally sensitive area right on the shore that Chesapeake Bay, it's already prone to flooding. I wrote this before I heard your discussion this morning, but you now know the plans that the city has for addressing coastal flooding and sea level rise. And I ask that you show your commitment to those issues by asking for more detail on how this particular project is going to satisfy or address those issues. We don't have anything right now with the stormwater management and water quality issues,you need more details there. This is the water we fish and swim in and I ask that you really take consideration of the environmental issues regarding stormwater quality as you consider this project. Thank you. Mr. Weiner: Any questions, thank you. Ms. Sandloop: Peter Scott, and then Andy Bond. Mr. Scott: Good afternoon,ladies and gentlemen. I am Peter Scott. I moved to Virginia Beach for one year, that was 12 years ago. I like it here and I stayed. I am a resident of Beach Heaven Drive which is the road immediately to the west of the development. I have three concerns. We have heard a lot about the 165 feet maximum height. You heard in the informal session this morning that the city has the authority to grant a deviation on that limit. What was not said this morning is that according to the ordinance, it should be a reasonable deviation and it should be where there is no significant detrimental effect on the neighboring properties. So firstly, I would like you to consider basically those requirements are not met. We've heard a lot about the density. It's a 17-acre site, 36 units per acre that's 612 units. The current development already has 540 units. So that means there is 70 left to develop. The council as I read it has no authority to relax that density requirement. And the third part is the senior housing facility development guidelines, that's incorporated as an annex to the zoning ordinance. It calls for compatibility. It calls proportionality. It calls for setbacks and it calls for maintaining the existing views. Now, we had heard by a previous speaker that the views are the icing on the cake. I agree. I'd like to keep mine. Bottom line, there are so many requirements where this does not meet the planning guidelines where the city has no authority to go against those guidelines. You have no option but to reject it. Thank you. Mr. Weiner: Any questions? Thank you, sir. Ms. Sandloop: And our final speaker, Andy Bond. Mr. Bond: Good afternoon. My name is Andy Bond, and I live in Cape Story. And I came down just to register my objection, because I'm worried, I love treating people fairly and equally, just as I'm sure you all do. And so, if you allow this, you're going to get more of this and that's what I object to too big. I also wanted to come down and support whatever Todd Solomon said, because he's one of the smartest guys I know and he told me that he didn't get a chance to tell you about a survey that our community put online. And so I wanted to share with you those results, which as I understand it, Todd has sent you as the from the Shore Drive community coalition, but just to put it out there in public, we got 515 responses, and 397 of them object and with regard to reason or justification for that opinion, looks like 461 and I'm not going to try to figure out the small print with regard to percentages because my eyesight isn't as good, but you have this and 461 out of 515 responses. We're worried most about the precedent that this would set which is exactly why I came down to voice my objection. Thank you for your consideration. Mr. Weiner: Thank you. Any questions? Thank you, sir. Mr. Bond: Thank you. Ms. Sandloop: No more speaker. Mr. Weiner: Mr. Nutter. Back to you. Mr. Nutter: Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. You know, with that many speakers, you would think that the staff had completely blown this and somehow I don't believe they have. You know, your staff better than anybody here in this room and including myself, by the way, so I do want to respond to a couple of things. First, I mean, we have no intention of trying to impede upon them at all. That is why we built in a 46-foot setback when 10 foot was required over four times the amount required by ordinance, that's why we redesigned the access ways into this building so that they would not get all the bad stuff. We would move it to the internal part of the campus down there, it's there today. All that's been done. It may not have been,they may have not seen that part that's been all been redone. I would like to talk a bit about the density issue though, because I'm afraid that they completely misconstrue the density issue in Shore Drive or anywhere else in the city. City Council, almost 20 years ago, amended the density ordinances for senior housing to be by use permit, and the density would be set in that manner. That's true all over the city, that's true for the existing Westminster campus and it's true for the expansion. I report to you that there is no density violation here, whatsoever. The reason council did that, by the way, was because senior housing doesn't have the impacts of non-age restricted housing. It has a completely different impact on public infrastructure. That's the reason they eliminated the density requirement. They also did it because they knew there was a need for senior housing in this area unless they did it outside of density restrictions in normal areas, they would never be able to meet that need. I can tell you right now, there are senior housing facilities all over this city that are there by use permit for the density set by Council in the use permit. There's no density violation here whatsoever. With regard to the height of the structure, you have heard a lot about that today. And let me just give you a couple of things to tell you about that. The city code, I'm afraid has somewhat conflicting provisions on the height in this area. And in fact, if you look at section 222 and 235, which outline the use of all the requirements for senior housing, the signage, the density by the way, the parking requirements, all that is set in there. Not one, there's no height restriction whatsoever. If you look at the section before, which is all zoned in Section 904, that ordinance sets the height. It says, for all uses within the district, there is no height limit for senior housing. So admittedly, if you look at another section 901 down in it, there's this 165 requirement. I have no idea why those sections don't coincide with one another. I don't, but I can tell you staffs been comfortable with this height. We've been comfortable with the height, as has BAC when they looked at this back in November, so I wanted you to know that we are, but finally, and most importantly, that conflict didn't exist, you have the ability, the council has the ability to set the height, and of course, what they think is built right here. So we're very comfortable with that. The one thing I tell you about this has really got me that particular view, Mr. Coston,that somehow we didn't meet the fire department requirements and I just want you to know,that we gave them every aspect of these buildings including they wanted 26 feet all the way around three sides of this building. Someone said there's only one side of the building that has that. Actually, all three sides have a minimum of 30 feet around this property. There's a turning radius that the fire department had to approve. I'm not sure what someone's notes reflect in a meeting, but we took notes of both they wanted and our plan reflects that. Finally, couple of things on the environment, we are huge stewards of the environment. We do not touch a primary sand dune. We are on the other side of the bulkhead. In fact, I will tell you that we're eliminating those portions of this project, existing buildings, go right up to the bulkhead. We're tearing those down, putting in a completely grassed area there, which doesn't exist today. We're retrenching from those areas. And I will point out that their properties are seaward of ours. Our building is going to be behind,nowhere their building is closer to the bay than ours. We take this very seriously. In fact, another point that I have to take issue with, it says we needed to have a Chesapeake Bay act approval for this. Well, we went to the Chesapeake Bay Board, reviewed the plans with them and they said we're going to approve this administratively because you're retrenching from the Bay. You're not going closer to the Bay, you're improving the situation not making it worse, we have the authority to do that by code. I want you to know, we take that very seriously. We're retrenching from these areas not building up to them. We're not having an effect on the dunes whatsoever. A couple of the comments had to do with the building being brick. Let me just tell you something. The problem we had with brick, notwithstanding, Mr. Wiener, I know it's close to your heart, on the Bay, we've had lots of water seepage through the brick in those buildings today to the point we've had to look at re- cladding them. It's a wonderful product. Mr. Weiner please understand, but that's been a strong driver of why we went to this region. As regard to the glass and the metal,those are actually more expensive in many cases than brick is, their products being used all over the country today, and they asked about the impact of the glass and the shade on one. We submitted a report to staff. I had no idea that there was such a thing as glare or an impact on adjacent properties. So fortunately, our architects did. And I'm here to tell you, they have submitted the report to you and that report showed that as long as the percentage reflection is 40% or higher, that's where you have damage to adjacent properties. This building is designed with a reflective ratio of between 9 and 13%,well under what they knew going in, and I didn't. But they knew, they were smart enough to know going in that we would not have an impact on adjacent properties. I think we've tried to look at, I'm trying to highlight some of the issues. One of the things about the impact of who can live here who cannot, I will tell you that what we did in this building is in this, in the new building is we made sure that one third of those units are subsidized, one third because we don't want this to be any more expensive as you know, we have a foundation which provides three different levels of financial assistance to people in that building. One entering in a building, Westminster Canterbury is only one of three senior housing facilities in the entire state,has a foundation to help fund people coming into the building. Now, I don't think going into I mean, coming in, they cannot meet the requirements,they will pay that difference for them. And as you also know, one third of the units throughout the entire project are subsidized by the more expensive units,they pay a higher amount so that others can live there on a subsidized basis. Finally, they have a fund that makes sure that if someone runs out of money while already here and that happens sometimes, unless of course as I mentioned, they go to Vegas, instead they want to blow all their money one weekend, barring that scenario, if they run out of money, then Westminster will carry them for the rest of their life, and give them $800 a month in spending money over and above carrying all their costs. So this isn't a group that funds it knows that the environment, it's that the people entering the program, it's not for everybody and there are lots of other products out there,but as a viable product that people here like, and the best testament to that 500 plus people sent a check to be on their waiting list, 500 plus. Another thing I like to mention to you is the impact say with lowering the building, which by the way, there's no reason to lower the building, none whatsoever. We've shown that there's the shadow studies don't affect the beach during the summer months and the shoulder months at all. The shadows do affect the beach during the winter months, when the shadows from near buildings affect the beach. It's just the nature of where the sun is at different times of the year. So there's no reason to reduce this, why would you do this because the effect is, quite frankly, for each, if you would lower this down, let's say 16 stories, you would eliminate 600 to 700 families being able to use that facility just to 20 years alone, 20 years alone. And on top of that, when you reduce that size and so forth, you make this far less affordable, not more affordable. That's the goal here is to build something first rate, that meets all the market demand, that's affordable as we can't,that's why they put it here. They can,if you will use the adjacent facilities they have to offset administrative costs. So I know there are people against it and I wish I could eliminate that, but one of the things I'll tell you there were concerns that we hadn't reached out to Ocean Shore and let me tell you what we did,we first met with the condominium owners that are behind us because there we were blocking their views. We were blocking their view. We met with them early on, we were concerned about that. They had this wonderful view over the Bay, over the parking lots all this time, and it was not going to change. And we're working with them and I don't think we've had one speaker from them. We met with Ocean Shore, we met with Ocean Shore, we sat down and we went to their management position and we went to them in November by the way, not December. Their management said, let us set up a meeting. But I would tell you, we've worked very closely with those people. And I come into very good resolution of issues with that. But I've also shared with you that we didn't get the date to meet with Ocean Shore people. We got it from their management that was in December. I wish it would have been earlier too, because of the holidays. There's not much you can do during that time period, but they asked us to defer the application and we did. We made sure we listened to them and hear their views. So,having said all this,I'll share with you that nothing has changed from our presentation. We still have your staff recommendation, your BAC, not recommendation but finding no concern. And we have your senior housing committee, which is looked at and by the way, it's more than a meeting, we had to submit a 10 page report to them on the hallway widths, ceiling heights, fire department issues,pull cords, and all that, not to mention the staff ratio, staff to person ratios. It's a 10 page report; you have to submit, so what the young lady saw or didn't see, but it's a long way from going to a meeting in a hallway with the Fire Department, it was a serious sit down meeting with the staff. And all of that comes with the recommendation approval. I would ask that you, I'm happy to answer any questions. There's a lot of factoids here, I am happy to go over, if you want to go over parking. I'm going to go over traffic, you want to go over the glaze study, we can go to the glaze study? I'm happy to go over that with you and answer any questions you might have. Mr. Weiner: Any questions? Yes. Mr. Horsley: Mr. Nutter will you address the idea of moving it to these from east to west side? Mr. Nutter: Sure, I'm happy to Mr. Horsley. The issue with that is the way the campus has been designed, they wanted to focus all the heavy activity where the traffic came in, where the truck deliveries were made and they want to keep that all on the inside of their campus close to where it is today and that's why,what they did is they revised the access way into the new building, the new IO building that was originally going to be on the far east side. That's where all the big truck traffic, they changed that. In fact, that was where all truck traffic and all vehicles to that building were going. We move that to the center, that's the reason why. They wanted to frame their campus and they wanted to move those facilities inside more central where they are today. That's why they left this way. Now, I'll also tell you that moving this building around like they say, which has, by the way would have almost no effect on the shadow increase by the way. Bear that in mind, on top of that then we start blocking views of the residents that live in Westminster today. They're entitled to their views, and we're not blocking one person's view to Ocean Shore. The building is set back 40 feet behind their buildings. You can look at the elevations. Unknown Speaker: [Group talk]. Mr. Weiner: When you go to city council,if it goes to city council, you can do it then,talk to the city council. Mr. Nutter: So anyway, we made sure we did not affect their views, there's going to be a building beside them one way or the other, we can affect that. But we looked at making sure we were behind the front of their buildings and providing big setbacks. So anyway, happy to answer your question, thank you Mr. Horsley for the question. Mr. Weiner: Any other question? Mr. Nutter: Yes, Mr. Wall. I'm sorry. Mr. Wall: Can you address construction, time frames, pile driving all that? Mr. Nutter: Yes, sure. We have doing geotechnical studies now, when we do that, we will determine if we do use augers or we'll do pile driving. We don't know the answer to that yet. It has to be based on the piles below, but what we did do, and when we do that is we go in for their permission. We put sensors on all their buildings,we put recording information on all of them, so we know if there's any impact or change in their facilities, and we're fully responsible for any damage that occurs during that time. The best thing we do,by the way is we have a schedule with them so that they'll be advised in advance what's happening when, and because parking is so tight in there, what we're doing is we're providing that the contractor has to complete, all his employees have to park completely off site, and they bring them in by shuttle, so to effect that, so we do that and I've done over this time,but I'll tell you last time we were doing this last expansion, Mr. Wall, we would go over and have picnics at the property next door once a month to make sure we were not an imposition. I don't know anybody in the world that does that, to be honest with you, but they did. So anyway, but yeah, they take that very seriously. Mr. Wall: Thanks, you know, where there's pile driving, which can be auger that hasn't been determined yet, so it could be, you know, months? Mr. Nutter: Trust me, and we have residents right there as well. If conditions are right, we'd sure like to pursue the other alternative. Mr. Wall: Duration, like what is the time duration? I think it was mentioned completion by 2025? Mr. Nutter: Well, let me tell you that schedule first and the first one eventually that's correct, by 2025. With the first building would be the typical AO building the seven story structure, that would be the first building that's constructed, we would then make some modifications to the parking in the existing campus and then we would go back into the IO building, so we don't expect to start the IO building to around late 22 or 23, this timeline. Mr. Weiner: Thank you. Any other questions? Yes, George. Mr. Alcaraz: Appreciate everything you've said so far. One thing some of the opposition stated about the beach access and one person or two might have said something about the fishing pier, the existing condition. Are you going to do anything with that? Mr. Nutter: Yeah, what we've already done, but and I wish there wasn't. There's one piece of hanging wood up there. I wish it wasn't there, to be honest with you, but yeah, what we did is we're relocating about 70 feet to the west. The new access way will be much wider, much nicer and will be the only handicap accessible access way on all that entire section of beach, there are six access ways along that section of beach. This is one of the five, one of the six; the new one will be wider. The existing one is three-foot wide concrete with trees on both sides. This will be six-foot wide as minimal with breakout areas for people who have carts and want to pass with other material taken to the beach. And with handicap accessibility and have four foot of landscaping on both sides. And it goes to the beach and by the way, I'll just tell you I have since this issue arose I have been out to that beach at least 10 times and in every single time even in February, I've seen people walk underneath that pier without restriction, no problem whatsoever. In fact, the pier has been there for over 40 years,people have traversed that. Our beach in front of Westminster is not private, its public and completely open and in fact, the amazing thing is most of our residents don't go on to the beach very much. They have the big lawn, and they have fire pits up there. They don't go on the beach as much. Mr. Alcaraz: Well, my question Mr. Nutter was, are you going to do any improvements to make a nice environment for ingress egress for under the pier? It's not a public beach on the left. Mr. Nutter: Right now,today,the clearance there is at high tide,is 10 foot something and there's about 63 feet of beach again at high tide. We do pictures of high tide and low tide and put them up on our website so we could show people but they're going to completely secure it when they take off What's mostly underneath is a problem and is the pipes from the restaurant that's been there all this time, all that goes away. It'll be much safer. It is pretty safe now unless you go right up to the bulkhead. But all that gets improved and taken out. Yes, sir, great question. Mr. Weiner: Any more questions? Thank you, sir. Mr. Nutter: My pleasure. Mr. Weiner: Anymore speakers? Ms. Sandloop: No. Mr. Weiner: We're going to close this to the public and open it up amongst the commissioners. Mr. Redmond. Mr. Redmond: There's a lot to unpack here, obviously. And I appreciate everybody being here today is very rare, we see this room this full, I do not appreciate necessarily some of the misbehavior. Always find it curious that people when they come down here would behave in ways that would get a middle schooler grounded. So probably better if we all kind of follow some rules of decorum. My problem with the Shore Drive corridor is that if you go and I'm there all the time. My brother lives within walking distance,my knives get sharpened by Low Tide Tim at the farmers market in Shore Drive. I eat at Lynnhaven Inlet. I shop around there. I'm there all the time, extremely well familiar with it is as you go along Shore Drive, and all you see is a wall. Tell me where you can ever see the Bay, if you're on Shore Drive, you can't. And the problem is the massing of buildings, these condominiums one of them, and it's only one of them because there's a lot of them all along the Bay. It is quite unlike the Ocean Front where you have more of these VISTAs where you can see to the beach, which is why to me; one of the most attractive elements of this is the building height and the reduction of that footprint on the site. I completely disagree with what Mr. May, the hired architect says. Expand the footprint and make it a big block like the old buildings. You know, I think those buildings you know, cannot fade into my memory fast enough whereas this is a much more attractive structure. It's more compact on the site allows for more scenic vistas to the Ocean Front. And as a fundamental principle of good planning that you have variation in building height, building design, building materials and building massing, and we try to achieve that all over the city, the idea that we would put the same kind of building on this larger block as you can obstruct as much of the bay as you can,just as we might have done in 1980, or 85, or very frankly, too frequently, to me makes no sense whatsoever from a planning perspective. From a planning perspective,you strive for applications like this that vary all of those planning attributes. And at the same time,do it in a high quality. I do not buy any of the arguments about private beaches or public beach with greater public access than it has today and it'll stay that way. I don't buy any of the wind arguments, all the rest of it, it just doesn't, you know, all these buildings would be tipping down all over Virginia Beach if that were the case, I work in Town Center, I have not melted because there are glass and steel buildings here. So none of those things to me hold a lot of water, what does hold a lot of water as what I see about how this site has been designed in a way to maximize the kinds of planning principles that we constantly strive for, in order to make for a better built environment. And I think that's what you get out of this project. There is a need, not just in Virginia Beach, but all over planet Earth, not a single one of us is getting any younger folks. So when we have projects like this that meet all those kinds of characteristics, and they do so in a way to provide need, I think we ought to support them and I'm going to support this one and I look forward to its construction and eventual use and I'm sure it will be iconic and I'm sure it will be a credit to this community for decades. Thank you. Mr. Weiner: Yeah, anyone else? Mr. Wall? Mr. Wall: Yes,I agree with Mr. Redmond. I agree that it's going to be a beautiful project,you know, very attractive. I agree with to a certain extent the massing and the locations for the most parts, you know, the building. I don't think the environmental impacts are as great to some of the properties that are already in that that area. Near the brick siding glass,you know, I think that was justified fairly well. I think the height was justified fairly well. The construction is a little concerning,you know,potential for pile driving. And,you know,years of construction,you know, adjacent to an existing condominium complex is, you know, that is a little concerning to me. The beach access is really not, it's a shift slightly down the street. I mean, I don't see that, you know, passing under the pier it's going to be that challenging for the most part. I think that there will be potentially times, you know, with high tides, that that could be a problem but not on a continuous basis. The one thing that is in a concern there is that, you know, 46 feet away from these people home, it's going to be a 22-story building and so that's you know, to me is a little bit much, it's out of character. You know, I agree with the, the wall of buildings, you know, all along the Shore Drive corridor and the blocking of parking the view, but, you know,just to me, the impact from that, alone in one day waking up, you know, it's not going to be one day, it's a couple of years, having nothing to 22-story building is just, you know, that's a little bit much to push it almost to the edge of the property line. And I see the reason for it, in terms of the private use on the property but I think it's my opinion too much for the adjacent property owners. I am not going to support it. Mr. Weiner: Robyn. Mr. Klein: So, I work with older adults in the aging population every single day. And so I am acutely aware of this need that we have more safe places for older adults to go. I toured the current facility and got a great overview of what the plans seem to be in it would be a beautiful building, but no one in my family would be able to afford to pay to stay in a place like this, even with significant financial support, you know, my generation, my mother or my grandmother, and that's the need that we have right now is for those of us who are making it. Where are we going to go as we continue to age and I have those concerns for my own family. And because of that, I will not be voting in favor. Mr. Weiner: Okay. Any other comments? I,like Mr. Redmond, I'm going to be in favor of this. I'm going to support it. I think it's something that's well needed. I'm going to support it. Do we have a motion? Mr. Redmond: Mr. Chairman, I move approval of the application. Mr. Horsley: Second. Ms. Sandloop: The vote is open. By recorded vote of 5-2, the motion to support the application has been approved. AYE 5 NAY 2 ABS 1 ABSENT 3 Alcaraz AYE Barnes ABSENT Coston AYE Graham ABSENT Horsley AYE Inman ABSTAIN Klein NAY Oliver ABSENT Redmond AYE Wall NAY Weiner AYE CONDITIONS 1.All conditions except for Number 1 attached to the Conditional Use Permit for the Home for the Aged, Disabled, and Handicapped dated June 9, 1998, shall remain in effect. 2.The Property shall be developed in substantial conformance with the conceptual site plan entitled "SITE PLAN - CUP",dated November 8, 2019, and prepared by D2 Architecture (the "Site Plan"), a copy of which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning. 3.The quality of architectural design and materials of the buildings to be constructed on the Property,when developed,shall be in substantial conformance with the exhibit prepared by D2 Architecture, entitled "ELEVATIONS- CUP", and dated October 31, 2019 (the "Elevations"), a copy of which is on file with the Department of Planning and has been exhibit to the Virginia Beach City Council. 4. Landscaping installed on the Property, when developed, shall be in substantial conformance with that shown on the exhibit prepared by WPL, entitled "CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE MASTER PLAN", and dated January 24, 2020 (the "Landscape Plan"), a copy of which is on file with the Department of Planning and has been exhibit to the Virginia Beach City Council.The exact species of the various types of landscaping shall be determined at final site plan review. 5.The Property, when developed, shall not exceed a total of 674 Independent Living units,75 Assisted Living units,48 Memory Support units, and 108 Skilled Nursing units.Total parking provided will be 1,096 parking spaces. 6. Prior to the approval of the construction plans, the applicant shall obtain City Council's approval for the encroachment of the proposed pedestrian bridges over Starfish Road and Ocean Shore Avenue. 7. Prior to the approval of the construction plans,the applicant shall have obtained the approval of City Council to relocate the existing public beach access easement from its current location at the eastern terminus of Starfish Road to the proposed new location along the applicant's northeastern property line. 8. The applicant shall be responsible for any access improvements deemed necessary by Public Works/Traffic Engineering Staff, upon completion of the review of the submitted traffic impact study. Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances and Standards.Any site plan submitted with this application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes and Standards. All applicable permits required by the City Code, including those administered by the Department of Planning/Development Services Center and Department of Planning/Permits and Inspections Division, and the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, are required before any approvals allowed by this application are valid. The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED)concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. • •. • • . Q p gp ertes5 suL.r`s pia March 4, 2020 Dear Virginia Beach Planning Commission and Council members, I am writing to you to express my support of the expansion that is being planned for the Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay campus. As a lifelong Virginia Beach resident who proudly served 29 years with the Virginia Beach Fire Department I know what an asset this community is to our city. I know communities around the country are facing a demographic tidal wave of older adults. In fact by the year 2030, experts estimate the number of adults age 65 and older will increase drastically -- a trend that is commonly referred to as the "silver tsunami." Other research forecasts that the senior population in our area is expected to increase by almost 50% in the next decade. As someone turning 65 in a matter of weeks that concerns me. That, along with other factors, such as minimal senior living construction activity, has made Virginia Beach one of the top three metro areas in the United States with the greatest need for senior housing. I've seen the renderings of the proposed 22 story glass building and I think it looks beautiful! I know it will be an asset to the Shore Drive community. I realize that some nearby residents have expressed concern about the expansion creating traffic issues in the area, but I've read the report on the traffic study Westminster-Canterbury conducted and I know through my work as a vendor on the campus that they are very mindful of the traffic impact on their neighbors. Westminster-Canterbury always provides adequate parking, as well as extra security personnel and their own staff who answer questions from drivers so traffic does not get backed up. It's so important that we as a city do not wait until we face a senior housing crisis, especially when Westminster-Canterbury is willing to step up to the plate to develop more housing options for me and others in the aging Boomer population. What also appeals to me is that they want to do it at no cost to taxpayers! This is a wonderful opportunity for our city to meet this housing need with a nonprofit organization that has been part of our community for nearly 40 years and has a long history of being a responsible neighbor and a good corporate citizen to our city. I respectfully ask that you and your fellow council members approve Westminster- Canterbury's expansion application. Sincerely, Robert M. Anderson President Anderson Multimedia Productions LLC 1908 Mariner Court, Virginia Beach, Virginia 23454 William R. Landfair From: Planning Administration Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 11:29 AM To: William R. Landfair Subject: FW: Expansion of Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Bill, Here is an email of support for Westminster Canterbury. Sent in the Planning Admin inbox on 3/6/2020. ABMarchelle L. Coleman, City Planner II City of Virginia Beach Virginia Beach Planning & Community Development 2875 Sabre Street, Suite 500 Virginia Beach, VA 23452 (757) 385-8557 (Direct) (757) 385-4621 (Office) mcoleman/vbgov.com From: dickandbetty binford <dickandbetty@hotmail.com> Sent: Friday, March 6, 2020 2:43 PM To:galcarazvbpc@icloud.com; wgrahamvbpc@icloud.com; horsley_don@yahoo.com; mainmain@inmanstrickler.com; branch.oliver@gmail.com; dredmondvbpc@icloud.com;johncoston@gmail.com; rjrklein@gmail.com;jckwall@aol.com; dweiner@batchelder-brick.com Subject: Expansion of Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay CAUTION This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Planning Commissioners: i At your next meeting, you will consider Westminster-Canterbury's application to expand its campus. We enthusiastically ask you to approve it. We not sure you are aware of it, but there was a study by a national accounting firm, covered in the national press two years ago, that showed that Virginia Beach is one of the top three metropolitan areas in the entire United States with the greatest future unmet need for senior housing. LeadingAge Virginia reports the population needing Westminster-Canterbury services will grow by 50% in just the next ten years. We have lived at Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay for over 5 years and it is one of the best decisions we have ever made. Here are just a few of the reasons why. Westminster-Canterbury's wonderful resident programming has kept us active and engaged. The program opportunities have empowered us to try new things. It also satisfies our desire to be life-long learners through its partnership with Virginia Wesleyan University. We also value that, as a non-profit organization, Westminster-Canterbury strives to make our community as affordable as possible to people of varying economic means. They price one-third of the apartments below the cost of the lifetime services provided. Through our Foundation fellowship assistance, living here is made possible for another 10% of our neighbors and friends. Westminster-Canterbury pays over$1 million in property tax and uses few services. What we are most proud of is that we give back to our City in so many ways. Last year, our fellow residents gave more than 32,000 hours of volunteer time. For example, in Virginia Beach, we have mentored and coached students at Seatack and Thalia Elementary Schools, served meals at the JCOC, and walked in the local Alzheimer's Walk. The list goes on and on. We know first-hand that we are good neighbors and responsible members of the Virginia Beach community. We strongly urge you to let Westminster-Canterbury help our city prepare for the baby boomers of Virginia Beach by voting yes on our application. 2 Sincerely, Richard and Betty Binford 3100 Shore Drive, Apt. 463 Virginia Beach, VA 23451 P.S. Please don't be swayed by the "increased traffic" argument that we hear from our neighbors. The residents will be retirees in a community that is nearly self-contained. We have little need to leave the campus, and when we do it is typically infrequent and outside what might be considered "rush-hour." 3 Dear Planning Commissioners and City Council Members: At your next meeting, you will consider Westminster- Canterbury's application to expand its campus. I enthusiastically ask you to approve it. I am not sure you are aware of it, but there was a study by a national accounting firm, covered in the national press two years ago, that showed that Virginia Beach is one of the top three metropolitan areas in the entire United States with the greatest future unmet need for senior housing. LeadingAge Virginia reports the population needing Westminster-Canterbury services will grow by 50% in just the next ten years. I live at Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay and it is one of the best decisions I have ever made. Let me tell you why. Westminster-Canterbury's wonderful resident programming has kept me active and engaged. The program opportunities have empowered me to try new things. It also satisfies my desire to be a life-long learner through its partnership with Virginia Wesleyan and its other educational programs. I also value, as a non-profit organization, Westminster-Canterbury strives to make our community as affordable as possible to people of varying economic means. We price one-third of the apartments below the cost of the lifetime services provided. Through our Foundation fellowship assistance, living here is made possible for another 10% of my neighbors and friends. Since its inception, the Foundation has provided more than $14 million in financial support to residents. Westminster-Canterbury pays over$1 million in property tax and uses few services. What I am most proud of is that we give back to our City in so many more ways. Last year, our residents gave more than 32,000 hours of volunteer time. In Virginia Beach, we have mentored students at Seatack Elementary School, served meals at the JCOC and walked in the local Alzheimer's Walk. The list goes on and on. I know first-hand that we are good neighbors and responsible members of the Virginia Beach community. I strongly urge you to let Westminster-Canterbury help our City prepare for the baby boomers of Virginia Beach by voting yes on our application. Sincerely, 3100 Shore [rives Virginia Beach, VA 23451 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Dear Planning Commissioners and City Council Members: I live at Westminster-Canterbury. At your next meeting, you will consider Westminster- Canterbury's application to expand its campus. I enthusiastically ask you to approve it. Past community leaders donated money and stepped up to build the first building, and later expanded our community when a second building was required. They acted in response to forecasts of future unmet needs. Their courage and action made room for me! It's now up to all of us to address the looming shortage coming in senior housing and services. Independent research shows that the senior population in our hometown is expected to increase by almost 50% in only 10 years. Virginia Beach has been cited in the press as one of the top three metropolitan areas in the entire United States with the greatest future unmet need for senior housing. It is time to act so that others are not deprived of a community lifestyle focused on joy, wellness and giving back versus being consigned to increasing isolation at home. Spreading existing overhead over more apartment homes on one campus will help Westminster-Canterbury meet its affordability goals, especially as it invests in more modern assisted living apartments. They can address the crisis for an even broader economic spectrum if they serve people at our current location (versus multiple campuses), where the organization can spread out the cost of existing overhead. Westminster-Canterbury wants to step up to the plate and help solve this looming housing problem. I strongly urge you to let them do so by voting yes on their application. Sincerely, I 27. • - L\1 n n, G.- . c.veA(' 3100 Shore Drive 5°ry Virginia Beach, VA 23451 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: Planning Administration Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 11:24 AM To: William R. Landfair Subject: FW: Westminster Canterbury Expansion Bill, Here is an email of support for Westminster Canterbury. Sent in the Planning Admin inbox on 3/6/2020. 1VBMarchelle L. Coleman, City Planner II City of Virginia Beach Virginia Beach Planning & Community Development 2875 Sabre Street, Suite 500 Virginia Beach, VA 23452 (757) 385-8557 (Direct) (757) 385-4621 (Office) mcoleman©vbgov.com From: William Bogue Jr<bbogue@yahoo.com> Sent: Friday, March 6, 2020 7:20 AM To: Bob M. Dyer<BDyer@vbgov.com>;James L. Wood <JLWood@vbgov.com>;Jessica Abbott<jabbott@vbgov.com>; Michael Berlucchi <mberlucc@vbgov.com>; Barbara Henley<BHenley@vbgov.com>; Louis R.Jones<LRJones@vbgov.com>;John Moss<JDMoss@vbgov.com>; Aaron R. Rouse <ARouse@vbgov.com>; Guy K. Tower<gtower@vbgov.com>; Rosemary C. Wilson <RCWilson@vbgov.com>; Sabrina D. Wooten <swooten@vbgov.com>; galcarazbpc@icloud.com; wgrahamVBPC@icloud.com; horsley_don@yahoo.com; mainman@inmanstrickler.com; branch.oliver@gmail.com; dredmondvbpc@icloud.com;johnhcoston@gmail.com; rjrklein@gmail.com;jckwall@aol.com; dweiner@batchelder-brick.com Subject:Westminster Canterbury Expansion CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello. 1 11.C.111 1. •1 l.J JCT.. UCll1tl.1 V 1117 1/l.l1 My husband and I are currently Chesapeake residents. We look forward to spending our future retirement years at Westminster Canterbury on the Bay. We are best described as residents living off site and expect to make WC our home in 1-2 years. We attend events and socials at WC. We make use of WC facilities and entertain guests there. We walk the beach and enjoy the view. We visited several Life Care communities before committing to WC. We did so because of their excellent reputation in the community, the many services offered and the many favorable comments by residents. We expect that more Life Care communities will be in demand to meet the future needs of the aging population. Westminster Canterbury's proposal is forward thinking and will help meet that need. Please support the expansion request. Thank you! Virginia and Bill Bogue Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPad 2 .L.111 Z. V OVA, t.k.,L..l V tat 7 V11 .,....Vut..,....., 1-/LL7 Dear Planning Commissioners and City Council Members: At your next meeting, you will consider Westminster- Canterbury's application to expand its campus. I enthusiastically ask you to approve it. I am not sure you are aware of it, but there was a study by a national accounting firm, covered in the national press two years ago, that showed that Virginia Beach is one of the top three metropolitan areas in the entire United States with the greatest future unmet need for senior housing. LeadingAge Virginia reports the population needing Westminster-Canterbury services will grow by 50% in just the next ten years. I live at Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay and it is one of the best decisions I have ever made. Let me tell you why. Westminster-Canterbury's wonderful resident programming has kept me active and engaged. The program opportunities have empowered me to try new things. It also satisfies my desire to be a life-long learner through its partnership with Virginia Wesleyan and its other educational programs. I also value, as a non-profit organization, Westminster-Canterbury strives to make our community as affordable as possible to people of varying economic means. We price one-third of the apartments below the cost of the lifetime services provided. Through our Foundation fellowship assistance, living here is made possible for another 10% of my neighbors and friends. Since its inception, the Foundation has provided more than $14 million in financial support to residents. Westminster-Canterbury pays over $1 million in property tax and uses few services. What I am most proud of is that we give back to our City in so many more ways. Last year, our residents gave more than 32,000 hours of volunteer time. In Virginia Beach, we have mentored students at Seatack Elementary School, served meals at the JCOC and walked in the local Alzheimer's Walk. The list goes on and on. I know first-hand that we are good neighbors and responsible members of the Virginia Beach community. I strongly urge you to let Westminster-Canterbury help our City prepare for the baby boomers of Virginia Beach by voting yes on our application. Sincerely, ( r 3100 Shore Drive -0 OY Virginia Beach, VA 23451 i - -r Dear Planning Commissioners and City Council Members: At your next meeting, you will consider Westminster- Canterbury's application to expand its campus. I enthusiastically ask you to approve it. I am not sure you are aware of it, but there was a study by a national accounting firm, covered in the national press two years ago, that showed that Virginia Beach is one of the top three metropolitan areas in the entire United States with the greatest future unmet need for senior housing. LeadingAge Virginia reports the population needing Westminster-Canterbury services will grow by 50% in just the next ten years. I live at Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay and it is one of the best decisions I have ever made. Let me tell you why. Westminster-Canterbury's wonderful resident programming has kept me active and engaged. The program opportunities have empowered me to try new things. It also satisfies my desire to be a life-long learner through its partnership with Virginia Wesleyan and its other educational programs. I also value, as a non-profit organization, Westminster-Canterbury strives to make our community as affordable as possible to people of varying economic means. We price one-third of the apartments below the cost of the lifetime services provided. Through our Foundation fellowship assistance, living here is made possible for another 10% of my neighbors and friends. Since its inception, the Foundation has provided more than $14 million in financial support to residents. Westminster-Canterbury pays over $1 million in property tax and uses few services. What I am most proud of is that we give back to our City in so many more ways. Last year, our residents gave more than 32,000 hours of volunteer time. In Virginia Beach, we have mentored students at Seatack Elementary School, served meals at the JCOC and walked in the local Alzheimer's Walk. The list goes on and on. I know first-hand that we are good neighbors and responsible members of the Virginia Beach community. I strongly urge you to let Westminster-Canterbury help our City prepare for the baby boomers of Virginia Beach by voting yes on our application. Sincerely, • i n le vte.0 3100 Shore Drive -+ 1 l Virginia Beach, VA 23451 Dear Planning Commission and City Council Members: I am a resident at Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay. At your next meeting, you will consider their application to expand the campus. I enthusiastically ask you to approve it. Virginia Beach has been cited in the press as one of the top three metropolitan areas in the entire United States with the greatest future unmet need for senior housing. Firsthand experience, tells me that it is time to act so others can benefit from the power of living in a community versus being consigned to increasing isolation at home. Westminster-Canterbury wants to step up to the plate with a solution. Your vote to approve their application will let them help solve this looming senior housing problem One issue that has come up is around traffic; that it will increase. I would have to disagree. Studies show that senior housing communities generate less traffic. That is true for Westminster-Canterbury because I, like the rest of the residents here, do most things within our community and tend to not leave the campus. For example, we have: o Three restaurants o A TowneBank branch office. • A health care clinic that offers urgent and primary care as well as specialists, lab services, mammograms and x-rays. o A gym, hair salon, chapel and a convenience store that includes a post office just to name a few services offered on our campus. To decrease traffic volume, even more, Westminster-Canterbury has a shuttle service that takes us to the grocery store, cultural events and other destinations. Also, remember, our travel and that of our family and other guests tend not to be at peak traffic hours when people are leaving to go to work and coming home. Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay has been part of our city for nearly 40 years. I know first-hand that we are a good neighbor and a responsible member of the Virginia Beach community. I strongly urge you to vote yes on their application. Sincerely, ,, r . _ -- .Z'ohrN A- t_ ‘v& GtiAA 310e"Shore Drive ga Virginia Beach, VA 23451 11C111`t. VV CSL111111JLC1 L.d111C1 UU1 y Oil L.11CJdpedrie lldy Dear Planning Commissioners and City Council Members: At your next meeting, you will consider Westminster- Canterbury's application to expand its campus. I enthusiastically ask you to approve it. I am not sure you are aware of it, but there was a study by a national accounting firm, covered in the national press two years ago, that showed that Virginia Beach is one of the top three metropolitan areas in the entire United States with the greatest future unmet need for senior housing. LeadingAge Virginia reports the population needing Westminster-Canterbury services will grow by 50% in just the next ten years. I live at Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay and it is one of the best decisions I have ever made. Let me tell you why. Westminster-Canterbury's wonderful resident programming has kept me active and engaged. The program opportunities have empowered me to try new things. It also satisfies my desire to be a life-long learner through its partnership with Virginia Wesleyan and its other educational programs. I also value, as a non-profit organization, Westminster-Canterbury strives to make our community as affordable as possible to people of varying economic means. We price one-third of the apartments below the cost of the lifetime services provided. Through our Foundation fellowship assistance, living here is made possible for another 10% of my neighbors and friends. Since its inception, the Foundation has provided more than $14 million in financial support to residents. Westminster-Canterbury pays over $1 million in property tax and uses few services. What I am most proud of is that we give back to our City in so many more ways. Last year, our residents gave more than 32,000 hours of volunteer time. In Virginia Beach, we have mentored students at Seatack Elementary School, served meals at the JCOC and walked in the local Alzheimer's Walk. The list goes on and on. I know first-hand that we are good neighbors and responsible members of the Virginia Beach community. I strongly urge you to let Westminster-Canterbury help our City prepare for the baby boomers of Virginia Beach by voting yes on our application. Sincerely, Dec. 'DAi\ k\.1 6,e_ 3100 Shore Drive co u S a. Virginia Beach, VA 23451 Dear Planning Commissioners and City Council Members: I live at Westminster-Canterbury. At your next meeting, you will consider Westminster- Canterbury's application to expand its campus. I enthusiastically ask you to approve it. Past community leaders donated money and stepped up to build the first building, and later expanded our community when a second building was required. They acted in response to forecasts of future unmet needs. Their courage and action made room for me! It's now up to all of us to address the looming shortage coming in senior housing and services. Independent research shows that the senior population in our hometown is expected to increase by almost 5G% in only 10 years. Virginia Beach has been cited in the press as one of the top three metropolitan areas in the entire United States with the greatest future unmet need for senior housing. It is time to act so that others are not deprived of a community lifestyle focused on joy, wellness and giving back versus being consigned to increasing isolation at home. Spreading existing overhead over more apartment homes on one campus will help Westminster-Canterbury meet its affordability goals, especially as it invests in more modern assisted living apartments. They can address the crisis for an even broader economic spectrum if they serve people at our current location (versus multiple campuses), where the organization can spread out the cost of existing overhead. Westminster-Canterbury wants to step up to the plate and help solve this looming housing problem. I strongly urge you to let them do so by voting yes on their application. Sincerely, (74/1-71-1--e / 3100 Shore Drive ci 5.7) Virginia Beach, VA 23451 it \\/ de DUBAY PROPERTIES February 19, 2020 R I A L & It L SID EN 1' 1 A L c ti, AI EST 4 T F; Dee Oliver, Chairwoman Virginia Beach Planning Commission 2875 Sabre Street, Suite 500 - Virginia Beach, VA 23452 Church PointComm(.ns,L.LG Dear Ms. Oliver:' . My.wife Sherri and I are residents of the Great Neck area and our office and businesses are located throughout Shore Drive. In addition, my wife and I own and have rehabilitated multiple residential properties throughout the Shore Drive area. I am also an active member of my Civic League and stay in touch with issues affecting the Shore Drive Community. It is with that background that I write to you and your other commission members. I have been briefed on the proposed Westminster Canterberry expansion and I must tell you that I am thoroughly impressed with the quality of the project design and the extraordinary steps they and their team have taken to ensure that this will be an asset to our area. It is my experience that Westminster has always set the standard for high-quality senior care. Their proposal will expand the services they offer to the residents of Virginia Beach and Hampton Roads. As a small property developer, I understand how significant it is to have a plan that focuses on reduced traffic impacts and providing more off-street parking than our code requires. Few developments on Shore Drive can make this claim. As someone with aging parents, the level of services and the quality of the facility offered by Westminster will be an asset to my parents and other seniors throughout the City. My parents would have to travel out of state to have the quality of lifestyle and amenities offered by this proposal. My wife and I proudly welcome Westminster's commitment''our City and the seniors that will be served by their proposal. Very truly y ur , Hayd n uBay 4360 Shore Drive c : RJ Nutter, II Virginia Beach,Virginia 23455 • telephone 757.460.6550 41478214 fax 757.460.6306 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake hay Dear Planning Commissioners and City Council Members: At your next meeting, you will consider Westminster- Canterbury's application to expand its campus. I enthusiastically ask you to approve it. I am not sure you are aware of it, but there was a study by a national accounting firm, covered in the national press two years ago, that showed that Virginia Beach is one of the top three metropolitan areas in the entire United States with the greatest future unmet need for senior housing. LeadingAge Virginia reports the population needing Westminster-Canterbury services will grow by 50% in just the next ten years. I live at Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay and it is one of the best decisions I have ever made. Let me tell you why. Westminster-Canterbury's wonderful resident programming has kept me active and engaged. The program opportunities have empowered me to try new things. It also satisfies my desire to be a life-long learner through its partnership with Virginia Wesleyan and its other educational programs. I also value, as a non-profit organization, Westminster-Canterbury strives to make our community as affordable as possible to people of varying economic means. We price one-third of the apartments below the cost of the lifetime services provided. Through our Foundation fellowship assistance, living here is made possible for another 10% of my neighbors and friends. Since its inception, the Foundation has provided more than $14 million in financial support to residents. Westminster-Canterbury pays over $1 million in property tax and uses few services. What I am most proud of is that we give back to our City in so many more ways. Last year, our residents gave more than 32,000 hours of volunteer time. In Virginia Beach, we have mentored students at Seatack Elementary School, served meals at the JCOC and walked in the local Alzheimer's Walk. The list goes on and on, I know first-hand that we are good neighbors and responsible members of the Virginia Beach community, I strongly urge you to let Westminster-Canterbury help our City prepare for the baby boomers of Virginia Beach by voting yes on our application. Sincerely, 0 qi/ 3100 Shore Drive # C) Virginia Beach, VA 23451 Dear Planning Commissioners and City Council Members: I live at Westminster-Canterbury. At your next meeting, you will consider Westminster- Canterbury's application to expand its campus. I enthusiastically ask you to approve it. Past community leaders donated money and stepped up to build the first building, and later expanded our community when a second building was required. They acted in response to forecasts of future unmet needs. Their courage and action made room for me! It's now up to all of us to address the looming shortage coming in senior housing and services. Independent research shows that the senior population in our hometown is expected to increase by almost 50% in only 10 years. Virginia Beach has been cited in the press as one of the top three metropolitan areas in the entire United States with the greatest future unmet need for senior housing. It is time to act so that others are not deprived of a community lifestyle focused on joy, wellness and giving back versus being consigned to increasing isolation at home. Spreading existing overhead over more apartment homes on one campus will help Westminster-Canterbury meet its affordability goals, especially as it invests in more modern assisted living apartments. They can address the crisis for an even broader economic spectrum if they serve people at our current location (versus multiple campuses), where the organization can spread out the cost of existing overhead. Westminster-Canterbury wants to step up to the plate and help solve this looming housing problem. I strongly urge you to let them do so by voting yes on their application. Sincerely, • t . 7 "\ i \ 3100 ore Drive+tic;SS—A'3 W Virginia Beach, VA 23451 March 4, 2020 Dear Planning Commissioner, As a five-year resident of Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay, a former Chair of the Virginia Beach Mayor's Commission of Aging, an eight-year former member of the Board of Trustees of Westminster-Canterbury, retired founder of a nationally recognized non-profit celebrating its 41st year of excellence, and presently Vice President of the Westminster Canterbury Resident's Association, I enthusiastically support the proposed plans for the future Independent Living apartment building and the Assisted Living and Memory residences. Westminster-Canterbury continues to be one of the best Life Plan Communities in the country. Independent research shows that the senior population in our hometown is expected to increase by almost 50% in only 10 years. As Virginia Beach and it's older adult population continues to grow, our campus needs to grow too to help meet that need. Let's address the senior housing shortage before it becomes a crisis. I also value that as a non-profit organization, Westminster-Canterbury strives to make our community as affordable as possible to people of varying economic means. They price one-third of the apartments below the cost of the lifetime services provided. Through its Foundation, living here is made possible for another 10% of my neighbors and friends. Since its inception, the Foundation has provided more than $14 million in financial support to residents. I love everything about this truly caring place. I feel safe, cared for, with excellent programs, a wide array of services and beautiful residences. The views are icing on the cake. Sincerely yours, Emily Harkins Filer , CVA, L.H.D. 3100 Shore Drive, PH 19, Virginia Beach, Virginia 23451 Dear Planning Commissioners and City Council Members: At your next meeting, you will consider Westminster- Canterbury's application to expand its campus. I enthusiastically ask you to approve it. I am not sure you are aware of it, but there was a study by a national accounting firm, covered in the national press two years ago, that showed that Virginia Beach is one of the top three metropolitan areas in the entire United States with the greatest future unmet need for senior housing. LeadingAge Virginia reports the population needing Westminster-Canterbury services will grow by 50% in just the next ten years. I live at Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay and it is one of the best decisions I have ever made. Let me tell you why. Westminster-Canterbury's wonderful resident programming has kept me active and engaged. The program opportunities have empowered me to try new things. It also satisfies my desire to be a life-long learner through its partnership with Virginia Wesleyan and its other educational programs. I also value, as a non-profit organization, Westminster-Canterbury strives to make our community as affordable as possible to people of varying economic means. We price one-third of the apartments below the cost of the lifetime services provided. Through our Foundation fellowship assistance, living here is made possible for another 10% of my neighbors and friends. Since its inception, the Foundation has provided more than $14 million in financial support to residents. Westminster-Canterbury pays over $1 million in property tax and uses few services. What I am most proud of is that we give back to our City in so many more ways. Last year, our residents gave more than 32,000 hours of volunteer time. In Virginia Beach, we have mentored students at Seatack Elementary School, served meals at the JCOC and walked in the local Alzheimer's Walk. The list goes on and on. I know first-hand that we are good neighbors and responsible members of the Virginia Beach community. I strongly urge you to let Westminster-Canterbury help our City prepare for the baby boomers of Virginia Beach by voting yes on our application. Sincerely, y� t �J6�c e�v1r cL 3100 Shore Drive Virginia Beach, VA 23451 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay March 4, 20451 George Franklin 3100 Shore Drive, #1101 Virginia Beach, VA 23451 Dear Planning Commissioners and City Council Members: I am a resident at Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay. At your next meeting, you will consider their application to expand the campus. I enthusiastically ask you to approve it. Virginia Beach has been cited in the press as one of the top three metropolitan areas in the entire United States with the greatest future unmet need for senior housing. Firsthand experience, tells me that it is time to act so others can benefit from the power of living in a community versus being consigned to increasing isolation at home. Westminster-Canterbury wants to step up to the plate with a solution. Your vote to approve their application will let them help solve this looming senior housing problem One issue that has come up from our neighbors is around traffic; that it will increase. When you look at the facts that just is not true. Studies show that senior housing communities generate less traffic. That is true for Westminster-Canterbury because I, like the rest of the residents here do most things within our community and do not leave the campus. For example, we have: o Three restaurants • A Townebank branch office • A health care clinic that offers urgent and primary care as well as specialists, lab services, mammograms and x-rays. • A gym, hair salon, chapel and a convenience store that includes a post office to name a few services offered. To decrease traffic volume, even more, Westminster-Canterbury has a shuttle service that takes us to the grocery store, cultural events and other destinations. Also, remember, our travel and that of our family and other guests tend not to be at peak traffic hours when people are leaving to go to work and coming home. Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay has been part of our city for nearly 40 years. I know first-hand that we are a good neighbor and a responsible member of the Virginia Beach Community. I strongly urge you to vote yes on their application. Sincerely, • George Franklin i 0 �JV w` He l 1° \ M ilL1)11(\1 tk beckn b.‘iS Dear Planning Commissioners and City Council Members: At your next meeting, you will consider Westminster- Canterbury's application to expand its campus. I enthusiastically ask you to approve it. I am not sure you are aware of it, but there was a study by a national accounting firm, covered in the national press two years ago, that showed that Virginia Beach is one of the top three metropolitan areas in the entire United States with the greatest future unmet need for senior housing. LeadingAge Virginia reports the population needing Westminster-Canterbury services will grow by 50% in just the next ten years. I live at Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay and it is one of the best decisions I have ever made. Let me tell you why. Westminster-Canterbury's wonderful resident programming has kept me active and engaged. The program opportunities have empowered me to try new things. It also satisfies my desire to be a life-long learner through its partnership with Virginia Wesleyan and its other educational programs. I also value, as a non-profit organization, Westminster-Canterbury strives to make our community as affordable as possible to people of varying economic means. We price one-third of the apartments below the cost of the lifetime services provided. Through our Foundation fellowship assistance, living here is made possible for another 10% of my neighbors and friends. Since its inception, the Foundation has provided more than $14 million in financial support to residents. Westminster-Canterbury pays over$1 million in property tax and uses few services. What I am most proud of is that we give back to our City in so many more ways. Last year, our residents gave more than 32,000 hours of volunteer time. In Virginia Beach, we have mentored students at Seatack Elementary School, served meals at the JCOC and walked in the local Alzheimer's Walk. The list goes on and on. I know first-hand that we are good neighbors and responsible members of the Virginia Beach community. I strongly urge you to let Westminster-Canterbury help our City prepare for the baby boomers of Virginia Beach by voting yes on our application. Sincerely, 1 j! 3100 Shore Drive - \ `et Virginia Beach, VA 23451 item vv estminster Lamernury on t,nesapeaxe nay COMMONWEALTH k%•0 LODGING March 3, 2020 Dear: VB City Council Members and VB Planning Commission Board Members, Soon,you will be considering the Westminster-Canterbury on the Chesapeake Bay expansion application. I strongly urge you to support it for several reasons. As the Managing Director of Commonwealth Lodging, I know first-hand the positive economic impacts a project of this magnitude will bring to the city given our recent first hand experiences surrounding the redevelopment and conversion of the old Virginia Beach Resort and Conference Center to the Delta Hotels by Marriott Virginia Beach Bayfront Suites. The additional apartments they are adding will mean more people visiting Shore Drive businesses-- not only by residents, but from their friends and family who visit them. As a result,we anticipate this will generate additional demand for lodging needs as well. Given the proximity of our business,we look forward to hosting the resident's families and friends of Westminster-Canterbury. This is a win-win proposal and only continues to enhance the Shore Drive corridor. Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay has been part of our city for nearly four decades and has a good track record as a responsible and active member of the Shore Drive business community. With the expansion, Westminster-Canterbury can help meet the housing and healthcare needs of more seniors in Virginia Beach, and the Shore Drive business community benefits from the increased visitors into their establishments. I respectfully ask that you approve their expansion application. Sincere) D ne Gauthiera Managing Director 208 Golden Oak Court Suite 100<' Virginia Beach. VA 23452 Tel: (757)333-7176'333-7176 0 Fax: (757)299-2976 March 4, 2020 Jane M. Gresham 3100 Shore Drive Apt. 208 Virginia Beach, VA 23451 Dear Planning Commissioners and City Council Members: I am a resident at Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay. At your next meeting, you will consider their application to expand the campus. I enthusiastically ask you to approve it. Virginia Beach has been cited in the press as one of the top three metropolitan areas in the entire United States with the greatest future unmet need for senior housing. Firsthand experience, tells me that it is time to act so others can benefit from the power of living in a community versus being consigned to increasing isolation at home. Westminster-Canterbury wants to step up to the plate with a solution. Your vote to approve their application will let them help solve this looming senior housing problem One issue that has come up from our neighbors is around traffic; that it will increase. When you look at the facts that just is not true. Studies show that senior housing communities generate less traffic. That is true for Westminster-Canterbury because I, like the rest of the residents here do most things within our community and do not leave the campus. For example, we have: o Three restaurants o A TowneBank branch office o A health care clinic that offers urgent and primary care as well as specialists, lab services, mammograms and x-rays. • A gym, hair salon, chapel and a convenience store that includes a post office to name a few services offered. To decrease traffic volume, even more, Westminster-Canterbury has a shuttle service that takes us to the grocery store, cultural events and other destinations. Also, remember, our travel and that of our family and other guests tend not to be at peak traffic hours when people are leaving to go to work and coming home. Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay has been part of our city for nearly 40 years. I know first-hand that we are a good neighbor and a responsible member of the Virginia Beach Community. I strongly urge you to vote yes on their application. I am an almost 93 year old resident that has a great need for a handicapped accessible bathroom. My current shower is a 3' x3' cubicle with a 5"step to enter. This requires an attendant for me to even enter the showner. Our current facility was built before any handicpped requirements were established. I hope to live ;long enough to see this new building completed and to move into it. What a thrill it would be to roll into the shower on my own with room for a shower chair. Sincerely, Tn• Jane M. Gresham r r w a1%.1 Va1111.1 V 1.1.1 y till `.111.oa".,a1,t. La y Dear Planning Commissioners and City Council Members: At your next meeting, you will consider Westminster- Canterbury's application to expand its campus. I enthusiastically ask you to approve it. I am not sure you are aware of it, but there was a study by a national accounting firm, covered in the national press two years ago, that showed that Virginia Beach is one of the top three metropolitan areas in the entire United States with the greatest future unmet need for senior housing. LeadingAge Virginia reports the population needing Westminster-Canterbury services will grow by 50% in just the next ten years. I live at Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay and it is one of the best decisions I have ever made. Let me tell you why. Westminster-Canterbury's wonderful resident programming has kept me active and engaged. The program opportunities have empowered me to try new things. It also satisfies my desire to be a life-long learner through its partnership with Virginia Wesleyan and its other educational programs. I also value, as a non-profit organization, Westminster-Canterbury strives to make our community as affordable as possible to people of varying economic means. We price one-third of the apartments below the cost of the lifetime services provided. Through our Foundation fellowship assistance, living here is made possible for another 10% of my neighbors and friends. Since its inception, the Foundation has provided more than $14 million in financial support to residents. Westminster-Canterbury pays over $1 million in property tax and uses few services. What I am most proud of is that we give back to our City in so many more ways. Last year, our residents gave more than 32,000 hours of volunteer time. In Virginia Beach, we have mentored students at Seatack Elementary School, served meals at the JCOC and walked in the local Alzheimer's Walk. The list goes on and on. I know first-hand that we are good neighbors and responsible members of the Virginia Beach community. I strongly urge you to let Westminster-Canterbury help our City prepare for the baby boomers of Virginia Beach by voting yes on our application. Sincerely, lyk\ �;� > ,�;, ;r A UOL) N PT 4 3-I S. 1 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: Larry Hazelwood <larryhazelwood@cox.net> Sent: Sunday, March 8, 2020 1:16 PM To: William R. Landfair Subject: Westminster Canterbury expansion plans CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach.Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Mr. Landfair: For your information, below is a copy of my letter emailed to Planning Commissioners. Thank you, Larry Hazelwood 2420 Ocean Shore Crescent,#202 Virginia Beach,VA 23451 The extensive expansion plans for Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay appears on the agenda for the Planning Commission session on March 11, 2020. As a resident of Virginia Beach and an adjacent property owner, I very much support the expansion initiatives of W-C. As it will produce a significant tax revenue stream for the benefit of the City and the citizens of Virginia Beach. However,their proposal as submitted, causes me considerable concerns: • Many of the property owners along Starfish Road and Ocean Shore Avenue will be denied the limited available public parking in close proximity to their properties. Initially by the 100+construction workers,vendors and delivery vehicles that will be jockeying daily for those favored spaces. Then once construction is complete, again those limited spaces will be utilized by employees,venders and visitors. Their vision of parking garages,with design flaws and short access radii will actually promote street parking in the public spaces. • I believe the height of the independent living building of 22 stories will set an irreversible precedent along Shore Drive. I would favor a building of the already existing height of W-C and constructed of similar exterior materials in keeping with the existing design character. • The positioning of this 22-story building(or even a 14-floor building)will impact the adjacent properties in several negative ways. It is quite obvious the planner positioned the taller building on the eastern most boundary of their property to minimize the impact of diminishing their existing vista. This done at the expense of the adjacent property owners that will lose their views as well as create a "walled in" effect that will certainly impact their quality of life and their property values. Simply inverting the footprint of the buildings will help to mitigate some of the aesthetic losses and financial impacts adjacent property owners will experience. 1 - -i - -r ---i • The idea of moving the public beach access further to the east, bordering the Ocean Shore Condominiums,will deny easy access by the public. The existing public access is used primarily by residents crossing Shore Drive by foot or bicycle at Starfish Road. Their proposal of re-locating the access further eastward is intended to channel the beach going public away from their property and the beach area in front of W-C complex. Essentially,y design,W-C is creating the perception that this stretch of beach is now private and the public is not welcome. • My fear is that existing property owners will be permanently losing the most coveted and cherished attributes of our Ocean Shore Avenue community living; that is our tranquil and peaceful environment, little or no traffic issues,our sunny green areas and our safe pedestrian/bicycle transit. As planners of our City's growth, please give careful evaluation of the irreversible impact this project will have on the City, residents and property owners. The applicant/owner certainly has the right to the highest and best use of their property, but does not have the right to damage our property,our home values and our pastoral way of life. Very Respectfully, Larry Hazelwood 2420 Ocean Shore Crescent,#202 Virginia Beach,VA 23451 2 Dear Planning Commissioners and City Council Members: At your next meeting, you will consider Westminster- Canterbury's application to expand its campus. I enthusiastically ask you to approve it. I am not sure you are aware of it, but there was a study by a national accounting firm, covered in the national press two years ago, that showed that Virginia Beach is one of the top three metropolitan areas in the entire United States with the greatest future unmet need for senior housing. LeadingAge Virginia reports the population needing Westminster-Canterbury services will grow by 50% in just the next ten years. I live at Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay and it is one of the best decisions I have ever made. Let me tell you why. Westminster-Canterbury's wonderful resident programming has kept me active and engaged. The program opportunities have empowered me to try new things. It also satisfies my desire to be a life-long learner through its partnership with Virginia Wesleyan and its other educational programs. I also value, as a non-profit organization, Westminster-Canterbury strives to make our community as affordable as possible to people of varying economic means. We price one-third of the apartments below the cost of the lifetime services provided. Through our Foundation fellowship assistance, living here is made possible for another 10% of my neighbors and friends. Since its inception, the Foundation has provided more than $14 million in financial support to residents. Westminster-Canterbury pays over $1 million in property tax and uses few services. What I am most proud of is that we give back to our City in so many more ways. Last year, our residents gave more than 32,000 hours of volunteer time. In Virginia Beach, we have mentored students at Seatack Elementary School, served meals at the JCOC and walked in the local Alzheimer's Walk. The list goes on and on. I know first-hand that we are good neighbors and responsible members of the Virginia Beach community. I strongly urge you to let Westminster-Canterbury help our City prepare for the baby boomers of Virginia Beach by voting yes on our application. Sincerely, 3100 Shore Drive # ! u rt Virginia Beach, VA 23451 Dear Planning Commissioners and City Council Members: I live at Westminster-Canterbury. At your next meeting, you will consider Westminster- Canterbury's application to expand its campus. I enthusiastically ask you to approve it. Past community leaders donated money and stepped up to build the first building, and later expanded our community when a second building was required. They acted in response to forecasts of future unmet needs. Their courage and action made room for me! It's now up to all of us to address the looming shortage coming in senior housing and services. Independent research shows that the senior population in our hometown is expected to increase by almost 50% in only 10 years. Virginia Beach has been cited in the press as one of the top three metropolitan areas in the entire United States with the greatest future unmet need for senior housing. It is time to act so that others are not deprived of a community lifestyle focused on joy, wellness and giving back versus being consigned to increasing isolation at home. Spreading existing overhead over more apartment homes on one campus will help Westminster-Canterbury meet its affordability goals, especially as it invests in more modern assisted living apartments. They can address the crisis for an even broader economic spectrum if they serve people at our current location (versus multiple campuses), where the organization can spread out the cost of existing overhead. Westminster-Canterbury wants to step up to the plate and help solve this looming housing problem. I strongly urge you to let them do so by voting yes on their application. Sincerely, 1,-44, A sk r\ 3100 Shore Drive .14 V h �G Virginia Beach, VA 23451 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: Planning Administration Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 11:26 AM To: William R. Landfair Subject: FW:Westminister-Canterbury's Expansion Application Bill, Here is an email of support for Westminster Canterbury. Sent in the Planning Admin inbox on 3/6/2020. 11/4)1/3 Marchelle L. Coleman, City Planner II City of Virginia Beach Virginia Beach Planning & Community Development 2875 Sabre Street, Suite 500 Virginia Beach, VA 23452 (757) 385-8557 (Direct) (757) 385-4621 (Office) mcoleman: vbgov.corn From:Terry Jenkins<Ijenkins37@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, March 6, 2020 11:18 AM To: galcarazvbpc@icloud.com; wgrahamVBPC@icloud.com; horsley_don@yahoo.com; mainmain@inmanstrickler.com; branch.oliver@gmail.com; dredmondvbpc@icloud.com;johnhcoston@gmail.com; rjrklein@gmail.com;jckwall@aol.com; dweiner@batchelder-brick.com Subject: Westminister-Canterbury's Expansion Application CAUTION This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Planning Commission Members, I am writing to request your support for the expansion application which will soon be considered by the Planning Commission. As a resident of the WC community who lives in the condos which will be replaced by new construction, I support the expansion for the following reasons. First,the demographics of Virginia Beach support the expansion of nonprofit life care facilities to meet the needs of an aging population. Secondly, having lived here for nearly four years, I can attest to the high quality of care that residents receive from a professional and committed staff and the Board of Trustees. I serve on a number of 1 1 l\.111 Z. V %.J V%Al7 %/AL V11�.JNyl.K1\\. 1/1I7 committees and know first hand how diligently staff address the needs and preferences of the residents and their family members while keeping abreast of national best practices. Finally,WC supports residents who may outlive their financial resources. I serve on the WC Foundation Board of Directors and am proud of the fund raising activities conducted by the staff and residents to help those who find themselves in financial need. Over the years,the Foundation has provided more than $14 million in financial support. The Foundation also encourages residents to volunteer not only on campus but in the community as well. Recently residents have focused on mentoring students at Seatack Elementary School as well as serving meals at the Judeo-Christian Outreach Center. We have also supported the Alzheimer's Association in their fund raising efforts. In summary, I hope you will support the expansion plan and look forward to the outcome of your deliberations. Thank you for your consideration of the application, and thank you for all that you do for Virginia Beach. 2 William R. Landfair From: Planning Administration Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 12:20 PM To: William R. Landfair Subject: FW: Expansion Plans for Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Bill, Email of support received in the Planning Administration inbox(3/4/2020) Marchelle L. Coleman, Planner II 2875 Sabre Street, Suite 500 Virginia Beach,VA 23452 (757) 385-8557 (Direct) (757) 385-4621 (Office) mcoleman@vbgov.com Original Message From: SUSAN JOBE<jobestj@cox.net> Sent: Wednesday, March 4,2020 3:13 PM To:galcarazbpc@icloud.com;wgrahamnVBPC@icloud.com; horsley_don@yahoo.com; mainman@inmanstrickler.com; branch.oliver@gmail.com; dredmondvbpc@icloud.com;johnhcoston@gmail.com; rjklein@gmail.com;jckwall@aol.com Subject: Expansion Plans for Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. The extensive expansion plans for Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay appears on the agenda for the Planning Commission on March 11, 2020. As a resident of Virginia Beach and adjacent property owner, I support the expansion initiatives of Westminster Canterbury as it will produce a significant tax revenue stream for the benefit of the city and citizens of Virginia Beach. Their proposal as submitted causes me considerable concerns: 1 * I believe the height of the independent living building of 22 stories will set an irreversible precedent along Shore Drive. A building of the same height as the existing buildings and built in brick would be more in keeping with the rest of the campus. * The positioning of a 22 story predominantly glass building will impact adjacent properties in several negative ways. It is quite obvious the planner positioned the taller building on the most eastern side to minimize change to their existing views.This is done at the expense of the adjacent property owners who will lose their views as well as creating a "walled in" effect the will impact their quality of life and property values.Simply inverting the footprint of the buildings will help mitigate some of the aesthetic losses and financial impact adjacent property owners will experience. * The idea of moving the public beach access further to the east, bordering Ocean Shore Condominiums,will deny easy access by the public. The existing public access is used primarily by residents crossing Shore Drive by foot or bicycle at Starfish Road. The proposal of relocating the access further to the east is intended to channel the beach going public away from their property and the beach area in front of WC. Essentially WC is creating a perception that that stretch of beach is now private and the public is not welcome. It also means that Ocean Shore will have a public beach access on both ends of their property. * The current plan has a service road located on the east side of the property that will have access to the tower loading dock, emergency generators, water room and fire room. This will create a lot of noise for the residents of Ocean Shore. A sound wall would be needed to lessen the noise coming from WC. As planners of our cities growth please give careful evaluation of the irreversible impact this project will have on the City, residents and property owners. The applicant/owner has the right to the highest and best use of their property, but does not have the right to damage our property, our home values and our way of life. Respectfully, Sue Jobe 2 Dear Virginia Beach City Council and Planning Commission Board Member, I understand you are considering the Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay's expansion application. I am contacting you to let you know that I strongly urge you to support it for a number of reasons. As the owner of Hot Tuna and Shorebreak Pizza & TapHouse, I know first-hand that restaurants and stores along Shore Drive benefit greatly from business by Westminster-Canterbury residents and staff not to mention all their family and friends as well. I know that this proposed expansion project would bring even more business to the Shore Drive corridor with tradespeople, consultants and others involved in the project. I understand there is some concern about the impact this expansion may have on traffic along Shore Drive. After reading about the traffic studies Westminster- Canterbury has already done it doesn't appear to me that this will be an issue. I have always found Westminster-Canterbury to be mindful of the traffic impact on their neighbors. The senior living community always seems to have adequate parking for not only residents and staff but visitors as well. Even at the Bands on the Bay event Westminster-Canterbury held in September, that was open to the entire community, there were plans in place to ensure traffic did not get backed up. The additional apartments Westminster-Canterbury is adding will mean more people visiting Shore Drive businesses — not only by residents, but from their friends and family who visit them. As a business owner this sounds like a project that has many benefits.The expansion will allow Westminster-Canterbury to help meet the housing and healthcare needs of more seniors in Virginia Beach, and the Shore Drive business community will benefit from the increased visitors. l'Iestminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay has been part of our city for close }o forty years and has proven to be a responsible member of the Shore Drive business community. That is why as a Shore Drive business owner I am respectfully ask that you approve their expansion application. Sincerely, Brett Kassir Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: Larry Klar <drfish13@aol.com> Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 2:00 PM To: William R. Landfair Subject: Westminster Cantibery CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Sir.As a resident of Ocean Shore Condominiums, I can't think of a worse idea than to allow the expansion of WC at the expense of nearby resident's way of life and property values decreases. Dr. Lawrence A. Klar Sent from my iPhone 1 / 1 / March 5, 2020 Dear Planning Commissioners: As Chair of the Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Foundation Board of Directors,I strongly urge you to approve Westminster-Canterbury's application to expand its campus. I know there is a real need for more senior housing. It has been unmet and continues to grow larger each year. In our last board meeting,this was an agenda topic and we discussed the independent research that shows the senior population in Virginia Beach is expected to increase by almost 50% in only 10 years. Westminster-Canterbury is a non-profit community treasure, still governed by volunteer leaders of our Hampton Roads community. Past community leaders donated money and stepped up to build the first building, and later expanded our community when needed with a second. They selflessly acted to address the certainty of future unmet needs in our City. Their courage and their action made room for the residents who live there now. I ask you to take a leadership role in addressing this housing shortage and vote for the expansion. If you do not act, many of our current citizens in Virginia Beach will go unserved. Some will lose out on living in this well-run, experienced community in their older years for lack of room and capacity, others because we were required to duplicate existing and expensive overhead on another site, distributing duplicate overhead over multiple campuses. One of the reasons I am honored to be on the Foundation Board is the fundraising we do to help ensure that people from varying economic means have an opportunity to live in this wonderful Life Plan community. Westminster-Canterbury prices one-third of its apartments below the cost of the lifetime services provided. Through the Foundation, living there is made possible for another 10% of residents thanks to the Fellowship Fund. Because residents are living longer, some are outliving their assets. At that point the Foundation steps in. No one is ever asked to leave for financial reasons. It is also important to note that Westminster-Canterbury is one of only three Life Plan communities in the state of Virginia that provides funds to incoming residents so they can afford to move into the community. Other Life Plan communities only provide funds when residents have outlived their assets. Since its inception,the Foundation has provided more than$14 million in fmancial support to residents. While not a Foundation initiative, I am extremely proud of how Westminster-Canterbury gives back to our City. And I am not talking about paying their real estate taxes,which they do. Last year, the residents gave more than 32,000 hours of their time. In Virginia Beach,they have mentored students at Seatack Elementary School, served meals at the JCOC and walked in the local Alzheimer's Walk. The list goes on and on. Westminster-Canterbury has been part of our city for nearly 40 years. My Great Aunt and Uncle, Bertha and Luther Hoy were two of the first residents. My Mom,Nancy Hoy, was blessed to be a resident for the last fourteen years of her life, fully involved and active for most of those years, She received expert and tender care when she could no longer live independently. I know first- hand they are a fine organization that is a responsible member of the community. I strongly urge you to vote yes on their application. Sincerely, Linda Hoy Lowrance Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Criesapeake tray Dear Planning Commissioners and City Council Members: I live at Westminster-Canterbury. At your next meeting, you will consider Westminster- Canterbury's application to expand its campus. I enthusiastically ask you to approve it. Past community leaders donated money and stepped up to build the first building, and later expanded our community when a second building was required. They acted in response to forecasts of future unmet needs. Their courage and action made room for me! It's now up to all of us to address the looming shortage coming in senior housing and services. Independent research shows that the senior population in our hometown is expected to increase by almost 50% in only 10 years. Virginia Beach has been cited in the press as one of the top three metropolitan areas in the entire United States with the greatest future unmet need for senior housing. It is time to act so that others are not deprived of a community lifestyle focused on joy, wellness and giving back versus being consigned to increasing isolation at home. Spreading existing overhead over more apartment homes on one campus will help Westminster-Canterbury meet its affordability goals, especially as it invests in more modern assisted living apartments. They can address the crisis for an even broader economic spectrum if they serve people at our current location (versus multiple campuses), where the organization can spread out the cost of existing overhead. Westminster-Canterbury wants to step up to the plate and help solve this looming housing problem. I strongly urge you to let them do so by voting yes on their application. Sincerely, AjLt /1 •iNkcai,k 011 G u,‘ Ct 3100 Shore Drive Virginia Beach, VA 23451 William R. Landfair From: Planning Administration Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 11:20 AM To: William R. Landfair Subject: FW:Westminster Canterbury's Expansion Bill, Here is an email of support for Westminster Canterbury. Sent in the Planning Admin inbox on 3/5/2020. BMarchelle L. Coleman, City Planner II City of Virginia Beach Virginia Beach Planning & Community Development 2875 Sabre Street, Suite 500 Virginia Beach, VA 23452 (757) 385-8557 (Direct) (757) 385-4621 (Office) mcoleman@vbgov.com From: Bill Miller<billm407@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2020 4:25 PM To: Bob M. Dyer<BDyer@vbgov.com>;James L. Wood <JLWood@vbgov.com>;Jessica Abbott<jabbott@vbgov.com>; Michael Berlucchi <mberlucc@vbgov.com>; Barbara Henley<BHenley@vbgov.com>; Louis R.Jones<LRJones@vbgov.com>;John Moss<JDMoss@vbgov.com>; Aaron R. Rouse <ARouse@vbgov.com>; Guy K. Tower<gtower@vbgov.com>; Rosemary C. Wilson<RCWilson@vbgov.com>; Sabrina D. Wooten <swooten@vbgov.com>; galcarazbpc@icloud.com; wgrahamVBPC@icloud.com; horsley_don@yahoo.com; mainman@inmanstrickler.com; branch.oliver@gmail.com; dredmondvbpc@icloud.com;johnhcoston@gmail.com; rjrklein@gmail.com;jckwall@aol.com; dweiner@batchelder-brick.com Subject:Westminster Canterbury's Expansion CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Members of Council and the Planning Commission, 1 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay As a lifelong resident, educator, and business owner, 1. who grew up in the 40's and 50's and moved back over 40 years ago to Great Neck Point (it was the Syer/Keeling farm then on the Lynnhaven River) to build a house where my family had a chicken house growing up, 2. who owned and operated Duck-In restaurant for many years on the same stretch of beach on which Westminster Canterbury (WC) is located, and 3. who has become an Early Advantage member of that amazing community, I heartily endorse their plans to help meet the needs of our aging population by expanding their facilities. The residents of WC are both great neighbors and customers of Shore Drive/North Great Neck/Town Center/etc. residents and businesses. Their staff, residencies, and assisted living, hospice, and therapy facilities are second to none and provide Beach citizens with a world class facility. Also, as the founding chairman of the Virginia Restaurant Association's Charitable Foundation, I am bowled over by the benevolence of their Board of Directors in providing "scholarships" for many who otherwise could not be able to afford to live there. Their Board is comprised of recognized leaders from all over Tidewater, but have chosen Virginia Beach as the home for this nationally known residential facility. For goodness sake and for many reasons, study the plans of this thoughtful and far-sighted Board and approve what will be a wise addition to what makes the quality of life in the City of Virginia Beach so wonderful. Sincerely, Bill William R. Miller, III 1900 Channel Points Lane Virginia Beach,VA 23454 bilim407@gmail.r,)0. 757-403-8921 -cell 434-339-0082-farm 2 11CII1 't: VV CSIII11I1S1CI l.axileruury on lAleSapea1CC nay Dear Planning Commissioners and City Council Members: At your next meeting, you will consider Westminster- Canterbury's application to expand its campus. I enthusiastically ask you to approve it. I am not sure you are aware of it, but there was a study by a national accounting firm, covered in the national press two years ago, that showed that Virginia Beach is one of the top three metropolitan areas in the entire United States with the greatest future unmet need for senior housing. LeadingAge Virginia reports the population needing Westminster-Canterbury services will grow by 50% in just the next ten years. I live at Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay and it is one of the best decisions I have ever made. Let me tell you why. Westminster-Canterbury's wonderful resident programming has kept me active and engaged. The program opportunities have empowered me to try new things. It also satisfies my desire to be a life-long learner through its partnership with Virginia Wesleyan and its other educational programs. I also value, as a non-profit organization, Westminster-Canterbury strives to make our community as affordable as possible to people of varying economic means. We price one-third of the apartments below the cost of the lifetime services provided. Through our Foundation fellowship assistance, living here is made possible for another 10% of my neighbors and friends. Since its inception, the Foundation has provided more than $14 million in financial support to residents. Westminster-Canterbury pays over $1 million in property tax and uses few services. What I am most proud of is that we give back to our City in so many more ways. Last year, our residents gave more than 32,000 hours of volunteer time. In Virginia Beach, we have mentored students at Seatack Elementary School, served meals at the JCOC and walked in the local Alzheimer's Walk. The list goes on and on. I know first-hand that we are good neighbors and responsible members of the Virginia Beach community. I strongly urge you to let Westminster-Canterbury help our City prepare for the baby boomers of Virginia Beach by voting yes on our application. Sincerely, I*yL&I4g1 42-- 3100 Shore Drive tv ciao Virginia Beach, VA 23451 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Wes st Amy Sheyer<amy.sheyer@wcbay.com> Fwd: Westminster Canterbury's Expansion 1 message Sandra Parker <sandra.parker@wcbay.com> Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 5:34 PM To: Amy Sheyer<amy.sheyer@wcbay.com>, "R.J. Nutter" <rj.nutter@troutman.com> Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Bill Miller<billm407@gmail.com> Date: March 5, 2020 at 4:25:32 PM EST To: "Bob M. Dyer" <BDyer@vbgov.com>, "James L. Wood" <JLWood@vbgov.com>, Jessica Abbott <jabbott@vbgov.com>, Michael Berlucchi <mberiucc@vbgov.com>, Barbara Henley <BHenley@vbgov.com>, "Louis R. Jones" <LRJones@vbgov.corn>, John Moss <JDMoss@vbgov.com>, "Aaron R. Rouse" <ARouse@vbgov.com>, "Guy K. Tower"<gtower@vbgov.com>, "Rosemary C. Wilson" <RCWilson@vbgov.com>, "Sabrina D. Wooten" <swooten@vbgov.com>, "galcarazbpc@icloud.com" <galcarazbpc@icloud.com>, "wgrahamVBPC@icloud.com" <wgrahamVBPC@icloud.com>, "horsley_don@yahoo.com" <horsley_don@yahoo.com>, "mainman@inmanstrickler.com" <mainman@inmanstrickler.com>, "branch.oliver@gmail.com" <branch.oliver@gmail.com>, "dredmondvbpc@icloud.com"<dredmondvbpc@icloud.com>, "johnhcoston@gmail.com" <johnhcoston@gmail.com>, "rjrklein@gmail.com" <rjrklein@gmail.com>, "jckwall@aol.com" <jckwall@aol.com>, "dweiner@batchelder-brick.com" <dweiner@batchelder-brick.com> Subject: Westminster Canterbury's Expansion Dear Members of Council and the Planning Commission, As a lifelong resident, educator, and business owner, 1.who grew up in the 40's and 50's and moved back over 40 years ago to Great Neck Point (it was the Syer/Keeling farm then on the Lynnhaven River)to build a house where my family had a chicken house growing up, 2. who owned and operated Duck-In restaurant for many years on the same stretch of beach on which Westminster Canterbury(WC) is located, and 3. who has become an Early Advantage member of that amazing community, I heartily endorse their plans to help meet the needs of our aging_population by expanding their facilities. The residents of WC are both great neighbors and customers of Shore Drive/North Great Neck/Town Center/etc. residents and businesses. Their staff, residencies, and assisted living, hospice, and therapy facilities are second to none and provide Beach citizens with a world class facility. Also, as the founding chairman of the Virginia Restaurant Association's Charitable Foundation, I am bowled over by the benevolence of their Board of Directors in providing "scholarships"for many who otherwise could not be able to afford tb live there. Their Board is comprised of recognized leaders from all over Tidewater, but have chosen Virginia Beach as the home for this nationally known residential facility. For goodness sake and for many reasons, study the plans of this thoughtful and far-sighted Board and approve what will be a wise addition to what makes the quality of life in the City of Virginia Beach so wonderful. Sincerely, Bill hfne-nr—ii nnnnlc, Rl'? =QQr.Rod'2Zh7Rvic.r_n4Recn rnc=ot 2.ru rmthvlcthroaA-f"/_AG 1RR11ZRF9'1d 111 coQRR9Rcimnlcmen_f"/_2A 1 RR(1ZC.F744/ 1/9 item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Dear Planning Commission and City Council Members: I am a resident at Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay. At your next meeting, you will consider their application to expand the campus. I enthusiastically ask you to approve it. Virginia Beach has been cited in the press as one of the top three metropolitan areas in the entire United States with the greatest future unmet need for senior housing. Firsthand experience, tells me that it is time to act so others can benefit from the power of living in a community versus being consigned to increasing isolation at home. Westminster-Canterbury wants to step up to the plate with a solution. Your vote to approve their application will let them help solve this looming senior housing problem One issue that has come up is around traffic; that it will increase. I would have to disagree. Studies show that senior housing communities generate less traffic. That is true for Westminster-Canterbury because I, like the rest of the residents here, do most things within our community and tend to not leave the campus. For example, we have: O Three restaurants o A TowneBank branch office. o A health care clinic that offers urgent and primary care as well as specialists, lab services, mammograms and x-rays. o A gym, hair salon, chapel and a convenience store that includes a post office just to name a few services offered on our campus. To decrease traffic volume, even more, Westminster-Canterbury has a shuttle service that takes us to the grocery store, cultural events and other destinations. Also, remember, our travel and that of our family and other guests tend not to be at peak traffic hours when people are leaving to go to work and coming home. Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay has been part of our city for nearly 40 years. I know first-hand that we are a good neighbor and a responsible member of the Virginia Beach community. I strongly urge you to vote yes on their application. Sincerely, ,a,„ UGC u • �� (13100 Shore Drive Virginia Beach, VA 23451 111.111 Z. Y V 1.J U11111J1\.1 \/(11111.1 V Ul 7 Vll Ulll.J0.tll.Q1\L IJ 7 Dear Planning Commission and City Council Members: I am a resident at Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay. At your next meeting, you will consider their application to expand the campus. I enthusiastically ask you to approve it. Virginia Beach has been cited in the press as one of the top three metropolitan areas in the entire United States with the greatest future unmet need for senior housing. Firsthand experience, tells me that it is time to act so others can benefit from the power of living in a community versus being consigned to increasing isolation at home. Westminster-Canterbury wants to step up to the plate with a solution. Your vote to approve their application will let them help solve this looming senior housing problem One issue that has come up is around traffic; that it will increase. I would have to disagree. Studies show that senior housing communities generate less traffic. That is true for Westminster-Canterbury because I, like the rest of the residents here, do most things within our community and tend to not leave the campus. For example, we have: o Three restaurants o A TowneBank branch office. o A health care clinic that offers urgent and primary care as well as specialists, lab services, mammograms and x-rays. o A gym, hair salon, chapel and a convenience store that includes a post office just to name a few services offered on our campus. To decrease traffic volume, even more, Westminster-Canterbury has a shuttle service that takes us to the grocery store, cultural events and other destinations. Also, remember, our travel and that of our family and other guests tend not to be at peak traffic hours when people are leaving to go to work and coming home. Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay has been part of our city for nearly 40 years. I know first-hand that we are a good neighbor and a responsible member of the Virginia Beach community. I strongly urge you to vote yes on their application. Sincerely, J 7-i- C t5 utIS( \ hf�` 3100 Shore Drive 4A Virginia Beach. VA 23451 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: Planning Administration Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 12:22 PM To: William R. Landfair Subject: FW: Espansions of Westminister-Canterbury campus Bill, Email of support received in the Planning Administration inbox(3/4/2020) Marchelle L. Coleman, Planner II 2875 Sabre Street, Suite 500 Virginia Beach,VA 23452 (757) 385-8557(Direct) (757) 385-4621 (Office) mcoleman@vbgov.com Original Message From: Chick Robison<cdrobison3@cox.net> Sent: Friday, March 6, 2020 10:29 AM To:wgrahamVBPC@icloud.com; branch.oliver@gmail.com; dredmondvbpc@icloud.com Cc:galcarazvbpc@icloud.com Subject: Espansions of Westminister-Canterbury campus CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Addressees.....I will spare you all the details of why WC should be granted full municipal approval of the expansion plans as I am certain you have seen plenty of that. Thus, simply said, WC is a crown jewel of VB and HR and enjoys a stellar reputation for its residents and community. Our demographic studies indicate that with the aging of the baby boomers and their entering the senior housing market, time is ripe to build a new tower to accommodate this demand....also the income levels within VB and the surrounding communities are such that the time is here to build a new tower. Please give favorable consideration and voting for the request of site plan approval..Respectfully.... 1 item 4: w estminster t.anterdury on unesapeaxe tray Chick Robison cdrobison3@cox.net<mailto:cdrobison3@cox.net> 757 423 1122/cell 757 630 7444 2 I 1 / Dear Planning Commissioners and City Council Members: I live at Westminster-Canterbury. At your next meeting, you will consider Westminster- Canterbury's application to expand its campus. I enthusiastically ask you to approve it. Past community leaders donated money and stepped up to build the first building, and later expanded our community when a second building was required. They acted in response to forecasts of future unmet needs. Their courage and action made room for me! It's now up to all of us to address the looming shortage coming in senior housing and services. Independent research shows that the senior population in our hometown is expected to increase by almost 50% in only 10 years. Virginia Beach has been cited in the press as one of the top three metropolitan areas in the entire United States with the greatest future unmet need for senior housing. It is time to act so that others are not deprived of a community lifestyle focused on joy, wellness and giving back versus being consigned to increasing isolation at home. Spreading existing overhead over more apartment homes on one campus will help Westminster-Canterbury meet its affordability goals, especially as it invests in more modern assisted living apartments. They can address the crisis for an even broader economic spectrum if they serve people at our current location (versus multiple campuses), where the organization can spread out the cost of existing overhead. Westminster-Canterbury wants to step up to the plate and help solve this looming housing problem. I strongly urge you to let them do so by voting yes on their application. Sincerely, (Id 7-(:- 3100 Shore Drive I I c i'- Virginia Beach, VA 23451 LLCM'i: VV Csllllliislei l aiiiei uui y Ull l.liesapeaLCC Day Vks nster�t17 Amy Sheyer<amy.sheyer@wcbay.com> Fwd: Support Letter for Westminster Canterbury Expansion 1 message Sandra Sancilio <sandra@sparkerpr.com> Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 3:46 PM To: Amy Sheyer <amy.sheyer@wcbay.com>, "Nutter, R.J." <rj.nutter@troutman.com> Here's Stacey's letter Get Outlook for iOS From: Stacey Shiflet<sshiflet35@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 3:33:31 PM To: Bob M. Dyer<BDyer@vbgov.com>;James L. Wood <JLWood@vbgov.com>;Jessica Abbott <jabbott@vbgov.com>; Michael Berlucchi <mberlucc@vbgov.com>; Barbara Henley<BHenley@vbgov.com>; Louis R.Jones <LRJones@vbgov.com>;John Moss <JDMoss@vbgov.com>; Aaron R. Rouse <ARouse@vbgov.com>; Guy K.Tower<gtower@vbgov.com>; Rosemary C. Wilson <RCWilson@vbgov.com>; Sabrina D. Wooten <swooten@vbgov.com>; galcarazbpc@icloud.com <galcarazbpc@icloud.com>; wgrahamVBPC@icloud.com <wgrahamVBPC@icloud.com>; horsley_don@yahoo.com <horsley_don@yahoo.com>; mainman@inmanstrickler.com <mainman@inmanstrickler.com>; branch.oliver@gmail.com <branch.oliver@gmail.com>; dredmondvbpc@icloud.com <dredmondvbpc@icloud.com>;johnhcoston@gmail.com <johnhcoston@gmail.com>; rjrklein@gmail.com <rjrklein@gmail.com>;jckwall@aol.com <jckwall@aol.com>; dweiner@batchelder-brick.com <dweiner@batchelder-brick.com> Cc: Sandra Sancilio<sandra@sparkerpr.com> Subject: Support Letter for Westminster Canterbury Expansion Good afternoon Mayor Dyer and Members of City Council and Planning Commission! Please find attached my personal letter of support for the Westminster Canterbury expansion. Sincerely, Stacey ;,— westminstercanterburysupportletter.docx 12K hlinc•Nmoil nnnnlo rnm/mo ilh,/f17i4_QQFAod 43h7Rvimn,cntRcoorrhro11Rnormihiricihronri_f0/_1A 1FRfl717(1dd1 3F cAAQA1Rcimnlomcn.f%ZA 1FRf17171)441 1/1 11C1i1't: VV CSl111111Slei L ailiex uui y Ull 1_11CSapeaKe Day March 9, 2020 Honorable Mayor Bobby Dyer City Council Members Members of the Virginia Beach Planning Commission Board 2401 Courthouse Drive Building 1 Virginia Beach, VA 23456 Dear Mayor Dyer, City Council and Planning Commission Members, I am writing in support of the proposed Westminster Canterbury expansion. Having been a working neighbor on Shore Drive for 29 years I found Westminster to be a great community partner. The residents compliment the Shore Drive area with support to the area businesses. The expansion will continue to serve the needs of our community in a professional and unobtrusive way. There is a great need for extended care and assisted living and Westminster has proven to be a successful in that field. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Stacey W. Shiflet Cc: Sandra Parker Joseph . Diane Kesterson 649 Piney Point Road Va. Beach, VA 23452 Dear Plan ningCommissioners, My wife and I are part of the aging wave of Baby Boomers who will soon be looking to downsize. We believe that Westminster Canterberry is a well run non-profit facility for the elderly and an attractive place to live. Both of us applaud their efforts to expand the facility to accomodate the anticipated influx of people of our generation. We are excited about their new plans on the Bay and look forward to becoming a part of that community soon. Without expansion, it is possible that they may not have room for us when we need it. As you look at the Westminster expansion plans for the east side of their property, please consider the help it will bring to the elderly community of our city. We know you must carefully think about all age groups as the city grows, however, we all want VB to be known as a vibrant place to live, work, play and retire: Westminster Canterberry certainly provides a wonderful place for area retirees to thrive in their golden years. Their new plans will enhance and expand that capability immensly! Your thoughtful consideration is appreciated. Sincerely, Joseph and Diane Kesterson NX,estmi ntnl�ur} Amy Sheyer<amy.sheyer@wcbay.com> Fwd: Westminster- Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay 1 message Sandra Parker <sandra.parker@wcbay.com> Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 4:46 PM To: Amy Sheyer <amy.sheyer@wcbay.com>, "R.J. Nutter" <rj.nutter@troutman.com> This is a letter from one of our Early Advantage members, Gloria Benson. I am also expecting one from Joe and Diane Kesterson as well... also hoping to have Miltons Bay Cafe and Lynnhaven Coffee House as well. Sandra Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Gloria Benson <glorybenow@gmail.com> Date: March 9, 2020 at 4:34:19 PM EDT To: "Bob M. Dyer" <BDyer@vbgov.com>, "James L. Wood" <JLWood@vbgov.com>, Jessica Abbott <jabbott@vbgov.com>, Michael Berlucchi <mberlucc@vbgov.com>, Barbara Henley <BHeniey@vbgov.com>, "Louis R. Jones" <LRJones@vbgov.com>, John Moss <JDMoss@vbgov.com>, "Aaron R. Rouse" <ARouse@vbgov.com>, "Guy K.Tower" <gtower@vbgov.com>, "Rosemary C. Wilson" <RCWilson@vbgov.com>, "Sabrina D. Wooten" <swooten@vbgov.com>, "galcarazbpc@icloud.com" <galcarazbpc@icloud.com>, "wgrahamVBPC@icloud.com" <wgrahamVBPC@icloud.com>, "horsley_don@yahoo.com" <horsley_don@yahoo.com>, "mainman@inmanstrickler.com" <mainman@inmanstrickler.com>, "branch.oliver@gmail.com"<branch.oliver@gmail.com>, "dredmondvbpc@icloud.com" <dredmondvbpc@icloud.com>, "johnhcoston@gmail.com" <johnhcoston@gmail.com>, "rjrklein@gmail.com" <rjrklein@gmail.com>, "jckwall@aol.com" <jckwall@aol.com>, "dweiner@batchelder-brick.com"<dweiner@batchelder-brick.com> Subject: Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay To Whom it May Concern: I was born in Portsmouth, VA &graduated from Churchland HS & ODU. As a retiree of Northrop Grumman involved in DOD contracting, i have also known many military families who look forward to retiring to the Hampton Roads area. i have friends whose parents & other extended family members choose Westminster-Canterbury as their final residence and can personally attest to the quality of life maintained at Westminster-Canterbury! As a Virginia Beach resident and future resident of Westminster-Canterbury(June 1, 2020), ! was excited to hear that Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay is planning to expand its campus. Life along the shores of the Chesapeake Bay at Westminster-Canterbury was part of my retirement plan & there will be many others who would also come provided there is room!A 5-star living & retirement arrangement as offered by Westminster-Canterbury on the Chesapeake Bay in Virginia Beach will continue to attract people & their families to our area for generations to come! As you probably know, communities around the country are facing a demographic tidal wave of older adults. By the end of this decade, experts estimate the number of adults over age 65 will increase drastically-- a trend that is commonly referred to as the "silver tsunami". Other research forecasts that the senior population in our hometown is expected to increase by almost 50% in the next decade. That, along with other factors, such as minimal senior living construction activity, has made Virginia Beach one of the top three metro areas in the United States with the greatest need for senior housing. Let's not wait until we face a crisis, especially when Westminster-Canterbury is willing to step up to the plate to develop more housing options for others in the aging Boomer population. And, they want to do it at no cost to taxpayers! htinc•/lmail nnnnin rnm/maillnl(19ikoQQcPnd QQh7RvinwvntRmarrhnaIIR.nnrmihirlofhrcari_fc/7AIRA(17')A7AQAARQ7QA47Rcimnl_mc n_f0/-QA 1 RA(177117AQA 1P) This is a wonderful opportunity for our city to meet this housing need with a nonprofit organization that has been part of our community for nearly 40 years and has a long history of being a responsible neighbor and a good corporate citizen to our city. I respectfully ask that you and your fellow council members approve Westminster- Canterbury's expansion application. Sincerely, Gloria Benson hftne•//mail nnnnlo rnm/mail/rif(17ik=OOARod ZZh7RtiintAr=nfReenrnheollRnermlhiri=fhroori-fo%RA1ARh79117AQARR470d97Reimnl=men_fo!ZA1ARr177717ROR 717 StSgrei Amy Sheyer<amy.sheyer@wcbay.com> Fwd: Westminster Canterbury 2 messages Sandra Sancilio <sandra@sparkerpr.com> Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 10:21 AM To: Amy Sheyer<amy.sheyer@wcbay.com>, "Nutter, R.J." <rj.nutter@troutman.com> Here's another email of support Get Outlook for iOS From: Kandis Arrington <kandi.arrington@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 10:11:19 AM To: Bob M. Dyer<BDyer@vbgov.com>;James L. Wood <JLWood@vbgov.com>;Jessica Abbott <jabbott@vbgov.com>; Michael Berlucchi <mberlucc@vbgov.com>; Barbara Henley<BHenley@vbgov.com>; Louis R.Jones <LRJones@vbgov.com>;John Moss <JDMoss@vbgov.com>; Aaron R. Rouse <ARouse@vbgov.com>; Guy K.Tower<gtower@vbgov.com>; Rosemary C. Wilson <RCWilson@vbgov.com>; Sabrina D. Wooten ; galcarazbpc@icloud,com <swooten@vbgov.com> Cc: Sandra Sancilio<sandra@sparkerpr.com> Subject: Westminster Canterbury Dear Planning Commission and City Council Members, I am writing in reference to the proposed expansion to Westminster Canterbury. I am 65 years old and a native of Virginia Beach. I grew up on the Chesapeake Bay and currently live on Shore Drive in Sayville at Lake Joyce. With that being said, I am the Baby Boomer that will most likely need a home with the amenities of Westminster Canterbury. As a community, we are so fortunate to have this option. I have visited the campus many times and have friends as residents. As I understand it, there is a waiting list of approximately 500? So why would we not vote unanimously for this expansion that will not cost the tax payers a cent? I urge you to vote yes for this expansion for Westminster Canterbury. Respectfully, Kandis Deafenbaugh Arrington Amy Sheyer<amy.sheyer@wcbay.com> Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 10:29 AM To: Sandra Sancilio <sandra@sparkerpr.com> Thank you! Sent from my iPhone On Mar 9, 2020, at 10:21 AM, Sandra Sancilio <sandra@sparkerpr.com>wrote: [Quoted text hidden] httnc•//mail nnnnla rnmfmmith,M9;lrn QaSRad44h7R,do,ea_ntkcoorrh=oilRnarmth;rt_throort_foG 24 RRfIRORSRR9d7l1A1 dR4Rcimnlcmcn_f0/_46 1RRl1RQRSRR) 1/1 Dear Planning Commission and City Council Members: In the coming weeks, you will be considering the Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay's expansion application. Please support this application. Westminster-Canterbury is a not-for-profit, mission-based organization. As a result, its revenues are reinvested into our community. The community measures its success by the satisfaction of myself and the other residents. That is important to me. A study by a national accounting firm, covered in the national press, concluded that Virginia Beach is one of the top three metropolitan areas in the entire United States with the greatest future unmet need for senior housing Westminster-Canterbury's expansion plan helps solve this housing shortfall and allows for more Virginia Beach seniors to retire in the city they love and have called home for many years, with no public taxpayer financial contribution. Because there is a need for more senior housing, and I want more seniors to have the same wonderful living and health care experience that I have had, I respectfully ask that you approve Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay's expansion application. Thank you for your consideration of my request. Sincerely, G %l G�N 3100 Shore Drive Virginia Beach, VA 23451 item 4: w estmmster Canterbury on Lnesapeaxe tray 3/9/2020 Mayor Bobby Dyer and Honorable Members of the City Council Virginia Beach City Council 2401 Court House Drive, Suite 281 Virginia Beach,VA 23456 RE:Westminster-Canterbury's Proposed Expansion Dear Mayor Dyer: As a second term Board Member of Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay, I strongly support their expansion plans. I ask that you approve Westminster-Canterbury's expansion application. I have a strong tie to Westminster-Canterbury as my mother worked there for many years and my father in law was a resident for three years until he passed away. The Board has relied on independent research which shows the senior population in Virginia Beach is expected to increase by almost 50% in the next 10 years. Virginia Beach has been cited in the press as one of the top three metropolitan areas in the entire United States with the greatest future unmet need for senior housing. Even now,there is a shortage in the market of residences for older adults. The Board and our consultants have worked hard to make the proposed plan take advantage of the fantastic natural amenity of being located on the Chesapeake Bay so that as many as possible of the current and future residents will be able to enjoy the views of the Chesapeake Bay. As a non-profit organization, Westminster-Canterbury strives to make the community as affordable as possible to people of varying economic means. It prices one-third of the apartments below the cost of the lifetime services provided. Through its Foundation, living here is made possible for another 10% of my neighbors and friends. Since its inception,the Foundation has provided more than$14 million in financial support to residents. I encourage you to make the decision to support the proposed Westminster-Canterbury expansion now and not wait until we are facing a crisis in the elderly housing market. Very truly yours, COMPO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY George L. Compo President Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: Planning Administration Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2020 2:45 PM To: William R. Landfair Subject: FW:Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay's expansion proposal Bill, See email below received in the Planning Admin Inbox on 3/10/2020. 41VBMarchelle L. Coleman, City Planner II City of Virginia Beach Virginia Beach Planning & Community Development 2875 Sabre Street, Suite 500 Virginia Beach, VA 23452 (757) 385-8557 (Direct) (757) 385-4621 (Office) mcoleman©vbciov.com From:John Sancilio<jsancilio@thebayway.com> Sent:Tuesday, March 10, 2020 12:58 PM To: Bob M. Dyer<BDyer@vbgov.com>;James L. Wood <JLWood@vbgov.com>;Jessica Abbott<jabbott@vbgov.com>; Michael Berlucchi <mberlucc@vbgov.com>; Barbara Henley<BHenley@vbgov.com>; Louis R.Jones<LRJones@vbgov.com>;John Moss<JDMoss@vbgov.com>; Aaron R. Rouse <ARouse@vbgov.com>; Guy K. Tower<gtower@vbgov.com>; Rosemary C. Wilson <RCWilson@vbgov.com>; galcarazbpc@icloud.com; wgrahamVBPC@icloud.com; horsley_don@yahoo.com; mainman@inmanstrickler.com; branch.oliver@gmail.com; dredmondvbpc@icloud.com; johnhcoston@gmail.com; rjrklein@gmail.com;jckwall@aol.com; dweiner@batchelder-brick.com Subject:Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay's expansion proposal CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. 1 - - ---i - r- --i Say Mortgage 4 better financial environment:- Dear City Council and Planning Commission Board Members: Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay's expansion proposal appears to be an impressive and viable option to effectively meet the increasing housing and healthcare needs of Virginia Beach's expanding senior population. The proposed expansion would also provide more work for the city's businesses and trades involved in the multi-year expansion project and generate new and continuous patronage from new residents and their visiting families and friends to existing businesses located in the Shore Drive area. Westminster-Canterbury's past and current track record with the city and in the Shore Drive corridor seems to indicate it will have a strong commitment to minimize any potential traffic issues or undesirable impact on its neighbors by providing adequate parking and additional personnel to address any concerns. The proposal also presents a great opportunity for the leaders of Virginia Beach to remain proactive in their ongoing efforts to meet the growing and changing needs of our city's citizenry. For these reasons, I respectfully ask that you support Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay's expansion application. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, 4.. John Sancilio Owner 2 L ll.1*I T. V V\.JL111111J1\.1 V U1 7 V11 L.11\.JatIL ai 1, Bay Bay Mortgage, LLC One Columbus Center Suite 600,Virginia Beach,VA 23462 Tel 757 410-9963 Fax 757 410-9964 3 11C111't: VV CJU11111JLCI l.41.11LCI UU!y WI t.11CJdpc 4KC Day William R. Landfair From: Planning Administration Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2020 3:13 PM To: William R. Landfair Subject: FW:Westminster expansion Bill, Letter of Support for Westminster Canterbury. Received in the Planning Admin inbox 3/3/2020. ABMarchelle L. Coleman, City Planner II City of Virginia Beach Virginia Beach Planning & Community Development 2875 Sabre Street, Suite 500 Virginia Beach, VA 23452 (757) 385-8557 (Direct) (757) 385-4621 (Office) mcoleman@vbgov.com From: Kevin Seldon<kseldon32@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, March 3, 2020 1:24 PM To: Planning Administration<PlanAdmn@vbgov.com> Subject: Fwd:Westminster expansion CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: 1 ll..111 2. ••l.J ll.l VUll lt.l lItll7 11(17 From: Kevin Seldon <kseldon32@gmail.com> Date: March 3, 2020 at 9:31:02 AM EST To: glanadmin@vbgov.com Cc:Sandra Sancilio<sandra@sparkerpr.com> Subject:Westminster expansion Dear Planning Commission members, I am writing this note in support of the Westminster Canterbury expansion on shore drive. Westminster has been a great neighbor to the shore drive community for over 40 years. There presence has contributed to businesses in this area that entire time.They provide a service that is presently in great demand and that will only grow in the future. In my opinion as someone who has lived and worked in this area for over 45 years,the traffic impact will be minimal. In view of the contributions that this facility makes in the local area, I respectfully ask for approval of their expansion request. Sincerely, Kevin Seldon Dockside Seafood 3311 Shore Dr Sent from my iPhone 2 111.111 Z. 111.J1 Jll.l V111111.1111417 Vll V111.J11Vl.l11\4 ✓ll7 March 9, 2020 Honorable Mayor Bobby Dyer City Council Members Members of the Virginia Beach Planning Commission Board 2401 Courthouse Drive Building 1 Virginia Beach,VA 23456 Dear Mayor Dyer,City Council and Planning Commission Members, I am writing in support of the proposed Westminster Canterbury expansion. Having been a working neighbor on Shore Drive for 29 years I found Westminster to be a great community partner. The residents compliment the Shore Drive area with support to the area businesses. The expansion will continue to serve the needs of our community in a professional and unobtrusive way. There is a great need for extended care and assisted living and Westminster has proven to be a successful in that field. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Stacey W.Shiflet Cc: Sandra Parker 10..111 Z. V♦V..J1111111J11.1 L cip%..cil.l. i cty Dear Planning Commissioners and City Council Members: At your next meeting, you will consider Westminster- Canterbury's application to expand its campus. I enthusiastically ask you to approve it. I am not sure you are aware of it, but there was a study by a national accounting firm, covered in the national press two years ago, that showed that Virginia Beach is one of the top three metropolitan areas in the entire United States with the greatest future unmet need for senior housing. LeadingAge Virginia reports the population needing Westminster-Canterbury services will grow by 50% in just the next ten years. I live at Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay and it is one of the best decisions I have ever made. Let me tell you why. Westminster-Canterbury's wonderful resident programming has kept me active and engaged. The program opportunities have empowered me to try new things. It also satisfies my desire to be a life-long learner through its partnership with Virginia Wesleyan and its other educational programs. I also value, as a non-profit organization, Westminster-Canterbury strives to make our community as affordable as possible to people of varying economic means. We price one-third of the apartments below the cost of the lifetime services provided. Through our Foundation fellowship assistance, living here is made possible for another 10% of my neighbors and friends. Since its inception, the Foundation has provided more than $14 million in financial support to residents. Westminster-Canterbury pays over$1 million in property tax and uses few services. What I am most proud of is that we give back to our City in so many more ways. Last year, our residents gave more than 32,000 hours of volunteer time. In Virginia Beach, we have mentored students at Seatack Elementary School, served meals at the JCOC and walked in the local Alzheimer's Walk. The list goes on and on. I know first-hand that we are good neighbors and responsible members of the Virginia Beach community. I strongly urge you to let Westminster-Canterbury help our City prepare for the baby boomers of Virginia Beach by voting yes on our application. Sincerely, • c-�A. --- L (,4 3 i oo :Ae 914 Item 4:Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: Planning Administration Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2020 3:13 PM To: William R. Landfair Subject: FW:Westminster expansion Bill, Letter of Support for Westminster Canterbury. Received in the Planning Admin inbox 3/3/2020. BMarchelle L. Coleman, City Planner II City of Virginia Beach Virginia Beach Planning & Community Development 2875 Sabre Street, Suite 500 Virginia Beach, VA 23452 (757) 385-8557 (Direct) (757) 385-4621 (Office) mcoleman@vbgov.corn From: Kevin Seldon <kseldon32@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, March 3, 2020 1:24 PM To: Planning Administration<PlanAdmn@vbgov.com> Subject: Fwd:Westminster expansion CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach.Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: 1 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay From: Kevin Seldon<kseldon32@gmail.com> Date: March 3, 2020 at 9:31:02 AM EST To: planadmin@vbgov.com Cc: Sandra Sancilio<sandra@sparkerpr.com> Subject:Westminster expansion Dear Planning Commission members, I am writing this note in support of the Westminster Canterbury expansion on shore drive. Westminster has been a great neighbor to the shore drive community for over 40 years. There presence has contributed to businesses in this area that entire time.They provide a service that is presently in great demand and that will only grow in the future. In my opinion as someone who has lived and worked in this area for over 45 years,the traffic impact will be minimal. In view of the contributions that this facility makes in the local area, I respectfully ask for approval of their expansion request. Sincerely, Kevin Seldon Dockside Seafood 3311 Shore Dr Sent from my iPhone 2 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: Planning Administration Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 11:35 AM To: William R. Landfair Subject: FW:Why I support the Westminster Canterbury on the Bay Expansion Plan Bill, Here is an email of support for Westminster Canterbury.Sent in the Planning Admin inbox on 3/7/2020. Marchelle L. Coleman, Planner II 2875 Sabre Street,Suite 500 Virginia Beach,VA 23452 (757) 385-8557 (Direct) (757) 385-4621 (Office) mcoleman@vbgov.com Original Message From:Susi Watson<tsusiw@hotmail.com> Sent: Saturday, March 7, 2020 5:41 PM Subject:Why I support the Westminster Canterbury on the Bay Expansion Plan CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Members of the Commission: I know you must be receiving a large amount of correspondence regarding the Westminster Canterbury expansion plans, with lots of important data building the case either for or against, depending on the viewpoint. As a brand new resident of Westminster Canterbury(January 2020), I'd like to tell you why I moved here, and why I support the expansion plan. I am part of an increasing demographic; an unmarried person with not much family to "take care of me" as I age. The realities of that situation are not comfortable-there are many senior living communities in our area, but few that offer the ability to truly"age in place"with grace and dignity. I've seen extended family members having to move facilities as many as three times in order to obtain the increased services that were needed as they became more 1 item 4: vv estminster Lanteroury on unesapeaxe tray infirm. Not a great option for those without family to facilitate those moves.And Westminster Canterbury resolves the additional fear of being uprooted due to inability to pay. With respect to aging with grace and dignity, I'm kind of amazed how kind and caring the employees here are. I guess I've been reading too many horror stories about elder abuse in senior communities.And there are many services and activities designed to keep residents engaged and healthy. In closing, let me just say that I did lots of research before deciding to come here. This is a well run facility, both fiscally and in terms of inspections from the appropriate senior agencies. For the record, I am not rich, and I know Westminster Canterbury is committed to keeping residency affordable for value received. This is a facility that Virginia Beach can be proud of, and helps make the city a great place to live. I would ask that you support the expansion plan in order to make the community available to more of our seniors. Respectfully, Terrie Watson Sent from my iPad 2 . -- ---- --- -_--� --- -------r------ ---/ Memorandum To: Virginia Beach City Council Virginia Beach Planning Commission From: Shirley G. Wharton, Citizen of Virginia Beach. Resident of Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Re: Westminster-Canterbury' s Proposed Expansion Project As a Virginia Beach resident and Board Member of the Westminster-Canterbury Foundation Board, I am writing to you in strong support of the Westminster- Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay's expansion project proposal coming before the Virginia Beach Planning Commission on March 11, 2020. I request your careful consideration and approval of their expansion proposal. As a retired local Healthcare Executive, I am keenly aware of the current and future needs of the senior population in our community. Research shows that the senior population is projected to increase by almost 50% over the next 10 years. Virginia Beach has been cited in the press as one of the top three metropolitan areas in the United States with the greatest future unmet need for senior housing. Currently there is a shortage in the market of two hundred residences for older adults. Westminster-Canterbury is attempting to provide a solution to this issue by submitting an application to the City of Virginia Beach to modify our existing use permit to add 217 new independent living apartment homes, 75 assisted living residences, and 48 memory care residences.. This project is budgeted at over$300 million dollars and is the largest private capital investment in the city. Virginia Beach has a longtime goal to be a "community for a lifetime." The expansion of Westminster-Canterbury's campus can help to make that goal a reality with no taxpayer financial contribution. As a not-for-profit organization, Westminster- Canterbury strives to make the community as affordable as possible to people of varying economic means. It prices one third of the apartments below the cost of lifetime services provided. Through its Foundation, living here is made possible for an additional 10% of my neighbors and friends. Since its inception, the Foundation has provided more than $14 million dollars in financial support to residents. Let's be proactive vs reactive and address this significant issue. This is an opportunity for our city to meet this housing need with a not-for-profit organization that has been part of our community for nearly 40 years. As a concerned citizen, and ten year resident of Westminster- Canterbury, I respectively request that you vote YES on our expansion application. Thank You for your time and consideration. 1 l\.111 Z. V T lJ JL...L vu111A..L VIA/r VLl �11�.Jur�.Ul\l. LJUJ Dear Planning Commissioners and City Council Members: At your next meeting, you will consider Westminster- Canterbury's application to expand its campus. I enthusiastically ask you to approve it. I am not sure you are aware of it, but there was a study by a national accounting firm, covered in the national press two years ago, that showed that Virginia Beach is one of the top three metropolitan areas in the entire United States with the greatest future unmet need for senior housing. LeadingAge Virginia reports the population needing Westminster-Canterbury services will grow by 50% in just the next ten years. I live at Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay and it is one of the best decisions I have ever made. Let me tell you why. Westminster-Canterbury's wonderful resident programming has kept me active and engaged. The program opportunities have empowered me to try new things. It also satisfies my desire to be a life-long learner through its partnership with Virginia Wesleyan and its other educational programs. I also value, as a non-profit organization, Westminster-Canterbury strives to make our community as affordable as possible to people of varying economic means. We price one-third of the apartments below the cost of the lifetime services provided. Through our Foundation fellowship assistance, living here is made possible for another 10% of my neighbors and friends. Since its inception, the Foundation has provided more than $14 million in financial support to residents. Westminster-Canterbury pays over$1 million in property tax and uses few services. What I am most proud of is that we give back to our City in so many more ways. Last year, our residents gave more than 32,000 hours of volunteer time. In Virginia Beach, we have mentored students at Seatack Elementary School, served meals at the JCOC and walked in the local Alzheimer's Walk. The list goes on and on. I know first-hand that we are good neighbors and responsible members of the Virginia Beach community. I strongly urge you to let Westminster-Canterbury help our City prepare for the baby boomers of Virginia Beach by voting yes on our application. Sincerely, 3 kLL'e' G.V\or k\ � MT •e;6' -' item °t: VV Cs1I111I1stet l.aittei oui y oil L iiesapeaice Day Westminster Onteroury ON CHESAPEAKE BAY March 5, 2020 Dee Oliver, Chairperson and Honorable Members of the Planning Commission VVo Bill Lanfair Virginia Beach Planning Commission 2875 Sabre, Suite 500 Virginia Beach, VA 23453 Dear Chairperson Oliver: As President of our Residents' Association, I can say with confidence that we have the enthusiastic support of our resident population (682 people reside at Westminster-Canterbury) for our expansion plans as presented to the City. In fact, while a few may be quietly against it, no resident has made his or her opposition known to me (unheard of in my experience on large issues). We want our children and friends to have what we enjoy, and at the most affordable prices: increasing the size of our campus to the extent proposed is necessary for both reasons. The Size of the Unmet Need A study by a national accounting firm, covered in the national press two years ago, informs us that Virginia Beach is one of the top three metropolitan areas in the entire United States with the greatest future UNMET need for senior housing. LeadingAge Virginia, the state's senior living provider trade association, reports the population needing our services will grow by 50% in just the next ten years. Impact on Older Adults in Virginia Beach I have lived at Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay for nearly five years, and it is one of the best decisions I have ever made. Let me tell you why. Westminster-Canterbury's wonderful resident programming has kept me active and engaged. The program opportunities have empowered me to try new things. It also satisfies my desire to be a life-long learner through its partnership with Virginia Wesleyan and its other educational programs. Additionally, residents have more opportunities to volunteer and give back. I also value, as a non-profit organization, Westminster-Canterbury strives to make our community as affordable as possible to people of varying economic means. We price one-third of the apartments below the cost of the lifetime services provided. Through our Foundation fellowship assistance, living here is made possible for another 10% of my neighbors and friends. Since its inception, the Foundation has provided more than $1.4 million in financial support to residents. 7100 Shore Drive. Virginia Beach, \`,k 23451 • Phone: (757) 4.96-1100 • www.wchay.com 1L1.111 Z. tt�.J .a UC111%.C.1 l/1.417 ,./11 U1ll.J CCt/\.OA\V LC1 Logic vs. Emotion Traffic;density is an emotional issue. Our residents, for the most part, do not go out to work every day. Additionally, we have a bank, medical clinic, hair salon, gym, two pools, pharmacy delivery, light groceries, and three restaurants on campus. Our plan already produces 24% LESS traffic than would exist if we merely reopened the Lynnhaven Fish House on the lot near the Bay, and added the same low rise mixed age condos on the rear lots where the Assisted Living building is proposed. Changes in traffic will not even impact the service level status of the Shore Drive intersection. However, reducing the height and size of the independent living building will have a real impact. Many seniors over the years will miss out on this lifestyle for sheer lack of capacity. Second, filling as much need as we can next to our current campus allows us to share amenities and overhead, making us more affordable and better able to serve a wider range of baby boomers. The height of the building does not impact the sun on the beach, especially in summer, nor on neighbors most of the year based on the north- facing beach. Lowering the building for emotional reasons will reduce the view of many of our existing residents and reduce our ability to fill the unmet need. Our Value to Virginia Beach We pay over $l million in property tax an.d use few services. But more importantly, we give back to our City in so many more ways. Last year, our residents gave more than 32,000 hours of volunteer time. In Virginia Beach, we have mentored students at Seatack Elementary School, served meals at the JCOC,and walked in the local Alzheimer's Walk. The list goes on and on. Westminster-Canterbury on the Chesapeake Bay has been part of our City for nearly 40 years. The special overlay district, already part of the public record when our neighbors arrived, earmarked this area for more senior housing. We know first-hand that we are good neighbors and responsible members of the Virginia Beach community. The residents of Westminster-Canterbury strongly urge you to let Westminster-Canterbury help our City prepare for the baby boomers of Virginia Beach by voting yes on our application. The capacity you create here may be the apartment home you, your friends, or relatives will need someday. Sincerely, 7./ /-7 ,fr v Z. John Wolfe President of Westminster-Canterbury Residents' Association cc: Honorable Members of the Planning Commission item q: vvesuniiisier I.ann ter uury on Lnesapeaxe nay William R. Landfair From: Planning Administration Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 11:24 AM To: William R. Landfair Subject: FW: Westminster Canterbury Expansion - Planning Commission Meeting - March 11, 2020 Bill, Here is an email of opposition for Westminster Canterbury. Sent in the Planning Admin inbox on 3/5/2020. NABMarchelle L. Coleman, City Planner II City of Virginia Beach Virginia Beach Planning & Community Development 2875 Sabre Street, Suite 500 Virginia Beach, VA 23452 (757) 385-8557 (Direct) (757) 385-4621 (Office) mcoleman@vbgov.com From: Aaron Adams<hadam006@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, March 5, 2020 8:37 PM To: Bob M. Dyer<BDyer@vbgov.com>;James L. Wood <JLWood@vbgov.com>;Jessica Abbott<jabbott@vbgov.com>; Michael Berlucchi <mberlucc@vbgov.com>; Barbara Henley<BHenley@vbgov.com>; Louis R.Jones<LRJones@vbgov.com>;John Moss<JDMoss@vbgov.com>; Aaron R. Rouse <ARouse@vbgov.com>; Guy K. Tower<gtower@vbgov.com>; Rosemary C. Wilson <RCWilson@vbgov.com>; Sabrina D. Wooten<swooten@vbgov.com>; galcarazbpc@icloud.com; wgrahamVBPC@icloud.com; horsley_don@yahoo.com; mainman@inmanstrickler.com; branch.oliver@gmail.com; dredmondvbpc@icloud.com;johnhcoston@gmail.com; rjrklein@gmail.com;jckwall@aol.com; dweiner@batchelder-brick.com Subject:Westminster Canterbury Expansion - Planning Commission Meeting- March 11, 2020 CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay [Applicant& Owner] Modification of Conditions (GPINs 1590004510, 1590100553, 1590101535, 1590102542, 1590009984, 1590009705 & 1590100956) 1 item 4: vv estminster ,anteroury on nesapeaxe nay March 5,2020 Virginia Beach Planning Commission, As a resident and property owner in Virginia Beach,I do not support the expansion initiatives of Westminister Canterbury. As an avid wildlife supporter and member of conservation societies aimed at building the population of migratory waterfowl,I cannot foresee how the City of Virgin Beach could trade the protection of waterfowl,which are included in a multinational treaty, for expanding a local businesses revenue.According to the U.S.Fish and Wildlife service, collision with building glass is currently estimated to be the second greatest source of direct mortality of birds. The current plan lends to this 22 story building that will be built in the Atlantic Flyway for Migratory birds. This could cause an irreparable effect on the wildlife in our area,and should be taken into consideration with this proposed construction.A national wildlife refuge for migratory waterfowl is located just 18 miles from the proposed location which is well within a migratory birds daily travel corridor across the bay. The proposed location for this build has already torn down one of the communities fishing piers,erasing equitable access to fishing for the surrounding community.The once equitable fishing pier is now planned to be used as a private property,denying residents of the area. The proposed build includes 217 units and a 399-car garage which will increase the traffic in an already densely populated location on the Chesapeake Bay's beaches. The residents in the immediate area will have diminished property values and lose the views that brought them to the area.Local residents have moved to this area to enjoy the quiet,affordable and readily accessible beach during the tourist season that has driven the ocean front communities to a resort style community. I do not support the expansion project and am hoping that logic will prevail in deciding on whether to expand a businesses profit margin at the expense of the local middle class tax payer. Voters and residents alike will take notice to your decision.I hope your vote will echo the constituents that you represent. Regards, Horace A Adams IV Virginia Beach—Shore Drive Resident and home owner 2 - - -- -. .. _ -- — -- — -- - ---r--- - - -i BofA GLOBAL RESEARCH BofA SECURITIES Senior Living 4Q19 industry data points to continued softness - we remain cautious Industry Overview Flat occupancy, anemic pricing, construction still high 10 January2020 According to the latest industry data,senior housing stabilized occupancy was flat Equity sequentially in 4Q19,worse than the historical trend, potentially due to a worse than United States normal flu season in 04.In addition,pricing remains somewhat weak and below labor HC Facilities cost inflation. Finally,construction slowed down but stays elevated,and inventory grows Joanna Gajuk faster than the underlying demand.The read through is somewhat negative for BKD and Research Analyst BofA5 CSU, leaving us cautious. +1 646 855 3961 joannagajuk@bofa.com HC REITs: cautious on senior housing given supply Kevin Fischbedc, CFA The latest data supports our cautious outlook on senior housingwithin Healthcare Research Analyst PPBofAS REITs. We believe that REITs with senior housing assets in high barrier to entry +1 646 855 5948 markets are best positioned to outperform - WELL best positioned. PEAK continues kevin.fischbeck@bofa.com to rotate itsportfolio into higherpricepoint assets in high barrier to entrymarkets. Joshua DAnalyst n g g Research Analyst Recent media reports on potential asset sales imply VTR may follow suit. BofAS +1 646 855 1681 AL occupancy improved Q/Q, IL was flat joshua.dennedein@bofa.com Accordingto National Investment Center for the Seniors Housingand Care IndustryJeffrey Spector Research Analyst (NIC),assisted living(AL)stabilized occupancy was +10bps Q/Q;it is still 10bps below BofAS +1 646 855 1363 the year ago level. Independent living(IL) occupancy was flat Q/Q and +30bps y/y-see jeff.spector®bofa.com Chart 1. For senior housing overall,stabilized occupancy was flat Q/Q for 31 MSAs, worse than the +20bps Q/Q average growth over the prior 8 years(Table 1). Occupancy (including properties in lease up) in 31 MSAs increased 10bps Q/Q to 88.0%,much better than the NIC projections of-10bps Q/Q,and was better than the flat stabilized occupancy trend.The overall occupancy in 100 MSAs increased 10bps Q/Q to 87.9%. Rent growth continues to decelerate For IL properties,rent growth decelerated to+3.0%.AL rent growth was much lower than that for IL,at only+2.5%,which is below+2.9%a year ago and below the recent peak of+3.8%in 4Q16. For senior housing overall,4Q19 rent increased +2.8%y/y, decelerating from the recent growth of+3.0-3.2%in 3Q18-2Q19—see Chart 5. Occupancy in key BKD/CSU states flat Q/Q Occupancy in 4 key BKD/CSU's states(TX, FL,CA and OH)was flat Q/Q, in line with the flat trend for all 31 MSAs.Occupancy declines in Ohio and Texas MSAs was offset by an increase in CA saw while FL MSAs saw occupancy flat Q/Q. See Table 2. In those MSAs, rent growth decelerated Q/Q to +2.4%,below the avg for all 31 MSAs. Inventory growth above near-term demand growth Senior housing inventory grew+2.7%y/y as AL(+3.1%)continues to outpace IL(+2.3%) Construction still high: 7% for AL, 12% for IL ex CCRCs SH construction while down from its recent peak, is still high at 6.7%as of 4Q. Excluding CCRCs, IL construction (11.9%)is above AL(7.3%). Construction in Primary&Secondary markets combined is 6.2%of inventory,down from the recent peak(7.3%) - Chart 10 BofA Securities does and seeks to do business with issuers covered in its research reports. As a result,investors should be aware that the firm may have a conflict of interest that could affect the objectivity of this report. Investors should consider this report as only a single factor in making their investment decision. Referto important disclosures on page 14 to 18. Analyst Certification on page 11.Price Objective Basis/Risk on page 10. 12081677 Timpctamn-1n lanuary 7f17n rn.c7AM FST BofA GLOBAL RESEARCH •uarterly update as of 4Q19 Occupancy flat Q/Q and flat Y/Y The average stabilized occupancy(see Chart 1) measures the occupancy at properties in the top 31 metropolitan statistical areas(MSAs)that are at least two years old or that have achieved occupancy of at least 95.00.Occupancy is measured as the number of occupied units/beds divided by the number of units/beds currently in operation for each property. For majority independent living(IL) properties,the average stabilized occupancy was 91.5%in 3Q19,flat sequentially. IL occupancy increased 30 basis points year over year. For majority assisted living(AL) properties,the average stabilized occupancy of 88.4% was up 10 basis points from 3Q19 and declined 10 basis points year over year. For senior housing overall(IL and AL combined),the average stabilized occupancy of 90.0%remained flat against 3Q19(3Q19 was revised down 10bps from 90.1%)and remained flat year over year as well. Chart 1:Average Stabilized Occupancy 94.0% - - 93.0% --- --- 92.0% - --- - ---- 91.0% - - - --- 90.0% - 89.0% - - 88.0% - 87.0% II II1111111111111 , 111 , 1 [ 111 ; 1111 , i I II I III I II 1 I I I ( r 1 1 I LC)(O(O(O(O I-- N N a0a0(b co 0)O)0)0) N N N N M M C)C') LC)l()lf)l(7 co c0<O(O N r--C-N-CO CO CO CO CD Cr,0)0) 0 0 0 C)0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0C'JUN'00 GNU'000UN'CM'3 000000Ucr Cs/ N'00000 0UN'0 000000UN'00J'0NU'000000U C3C5U5 0U0050 0 0' NU'0 0U' —Senior Housing IL —AL Source MC MAR,Data and Analysis Service Nursing care occupancy flat Q/Q,in Iine with historical trends Stabilized occupancy for majority nursing care properties decreased was flat sequentially in 4Q19 at 86.7%.Historically, nursing care occupancy has been flat Q/Q in Q4 vs Q3. The flat occupancy this year is worse than the+20 basis points Q/Q increase in 4Q18 and an improvement versus the-10bps seen in 4Q17.This is a read through for Genesis (GEN). 2 Senior Living 110 January 2020 ��/� 1LC111`±: VV CSUIIUISLC1 t.Q11LG1UU1y U11 l 11CJddiJCcUlr DQy BofA GLOBAL RESEARCH Chart 2:Average Stabilized Occupancy for Majority Nursing Care Properties 92.0% - 91.0% 90.0% 89,0% 88.0% - . . 87.0% - --- - 86.0% - 85.0% - 84.0% to CD CO n N- OD OD 0) O) O O ,- N N M M V crV7 (0 CD CD N- N- OD CO 0) D) CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD V N `7 N sT 4 4 N V' N 4 4 R. 4 N 4 N 4 N 4 N 4 N 4 N 4 Source:NIC MAP®Data and Analysis Service Stabilized occupancy flat Q/Q,worse than historical trends On average since 2006,Q4 occupancy for NIC 31 MSAs was flat sequentially from Q3. Excluding the declines in 2007-2009,occupancy increased 20bps Q/Q in Q4 vs Q3. In 4Q19,stabilized occupancy was flat Q/Q at 90.0%,better than the historical +20bps average increase.The flat trend in 4Q19 is an in line with the trend seen in 4Q18 and 4Q17(both flat sequentially). It is below trends seen in 2011-2016. Table 1:Occupancy trends Q4 vs Q3 among MAP31 Markets AL IL SH Q4 Q3 Change Q4 Q3 Change Q4 Q3 Change 2006 90.9% 91.0% -0.1% 93.4% 93.5% -0.1% 92.4% 92.4% 0.0% 2007 90.6% 90.7% -0.1% 92.5% 92.8% -0.3% 91.7% 91.9% -0.2% 2008 88.9% 89.3% -0.4% 90.6% 91.1% -0.5% 89.9% 90.4% -0.5% 2009 88.3% 88.5% -0.2% 89.1% 89.4% -0.3% 88.8% 89.1% -0.3% 2010 88.8% 88.7% 0.1% 88.3% 88.4% -0.1% 88.5% 88.5% 0.0% 2011 89.1% 88.9% 0.2% 88.9% 88.7% 0.2% 89.0% 88.8% 0.2% 2012 89.9% 89.7% 0.2% 89.6% 89.4% 0.2% 89.7% 89.5% 0.2% 2013 90.4% 90.3% 0.1% 90.4% 89.8% 0.6% 90.4% 90.0% 0.4% 2014 90.9% 90.9% 0.0% 91.4% 91.1% 0.3% 91.2% 91.0% 0.2% 2015 90.4% 90.2% 0.2% 91.8% 91.6% 0.2% 91.2% 91.0% 0.2% 2016 90.1% 90.0% 0.1% 91.8% 91.7% 0.1% 91.0% 90.9% 0.1% 2017 89.2% 89.2% 0.0% 91.5% 91.5% 0.0% 90.4% 90.4% 0.0% 2018 88.5% 88.4% 0.1% 91.2% 91.3% -0.1% 90.0% 90.0% 0.0% 2019 88.4% 88.3% 0.1% 91.5% 91.5% 0.0% 90.0% 90.0% 0.0% Average 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Source:NIC MAPS Data and Analysis Service,BofA Global Research. Meanwhile,the overall occupancy in 31 MSAs,which includes stabilized properties as well as properties in lease up, increased 10 basis points Q/Q to 88.0%(3Q19 was revised 10 bps downwards),much better than the NIC projections of-10bps Q/Q,and was better than the flat stabilized occupancy trend. For the NIC 100 MSAs,stabilized occupancy increased 10bps Q/Q to 89.9% in 4Q19, above the historical trend of flat Q/Q occupancy in Q4 vs Q3.The+20bps in 3Q19 is above the flat Q/Q reads in 3Q18 and 3Q17. Overall occupancy(including those assets in lease up) in 100 MSAs also increased 10bps sequentially Q/Q,to 87.9%. ���� Senior Living 110 January 2020 3 item'i: vv estminster Lanteroury on k_,nesapeaxe na) BofA GLOBAL RESEARCH Trend in states where BKD and CSU have most exposure in line with average The average stabilized occupancy was flat sequentially in 4Q19 at 88.7%in states where BKD and CSU have the most exposure,in line with the flat trend for all 31 MSAs. Senior housing stabilized occupancy was down 10 basis points in Texas MSAs(22%of CSU units, 16%of BKD),20 basis points in Ohio(11%of CSU units,5%of BKD) remained flat in Florida MSAs(23%of BKD units, 1%of CSU)and up 10 basis points in California MSAs(2%of CSU units, 15%of BKD). Table 2:Occupancy in key states 1Q19 vs 2Q19 vs 3Q19 vs 4019 vs 4018 4018 1Q19 1Q19 2019 2Q19 3019 3Q19 4Q19 Florida MSAs 88.6% 0.1% 88.8% -0.1% 88.6% 0.1% 88.7% 0.0% 88.7% CalifomiaMSAs 91.7% -0.3% 91.5% -0.1% 91.3% 0.2% 91.5% 0.1% 91.5% Texas MSAs 84.2% 0.3% 84.5% 0.3% 84.8% 0.7% 85.5% -0.1% 85.4% Ohio MSAs 88.7% -0.2% 88.6% 0.5% 89.1% 0.3% 89.4% -0.2% 89.1% Average 88.3% 0.0% 88.3% 0.1% 88.4% 0.3% 88.7% -0.1% 88.7% Q/Q 0.0% 0.2% 0.3% -0.1% Source:NIC MAP®Data and Analysis Service,BofA Global Research Historical industry trend directionally consistent with BKD,CSU and ESC The year over year increase in the stabilized occupancy for senior housing has historically been directionally consistent with same store occupancy growth at BKD,CSU and ESC(see Chart 3).We note ESC 3Q13 results were impacted by negative media,and CSU 2013 results were impacted by attrition and CCRC bed conversions. Meanwhile, BKD occupancy in 2H13 and 2014 was lagging the industry as the company was more focused on pushing pricing which outperformed the industry. Chart 3:Senior Housing Industry Occupancy Increase(y/y)vs.BKD,CSU and ESC(same store) 4.0% - 3.0% - 2.0% - 0.0% Nor _4111hhk.._ Ipplitt„ 1711111 ••-- . 1 -3.0% -4.0% - --- CO N.t`N I-o0 O o0 CO 0)0)0)O)O O O O e-'- -N N N N M C)CO Cr')V V-V if)Cf)LO 1.7 CO CO CO CO N-n N N-o0 oO e0(0 0)0)O)O) O O O O C)O O O O O O O O VaRic9c3oc7°R,9ciR2V-°2Roandd°(95?-c5R2-aaRV-c dc2.51-acCIPC:VicCIRPracgc9� Senior Housing ESC -BKD -CSU Source:NIC MAP®Data and Analysis Service Table 3:Portfolio mix(%of total units) IL AL Memory Care SNFs CSU 45% 47% 8% 0% BKD 33% 49% 13% 5% Source.BofA Global Research We note that the senior housing category reported by NIC is skewed more towards independent living than units at BKD and CSU.The senior housing category is composed of-46%IL units/45%AL units(AL units includes memory care;remaining 8%are SNFs) versus 33% IL units/62%AL units, including Memory care units for BKD,and 45%IL units/55%AL units including memory care for CSU. However,the historical correlation between the year over year increase in the stabilized occupancy for assisted living and 4 Senior Living I 10 January 2020 ��/� BofA GLOBAL RESEARCH same store occupancy growth at BKD,CSU and ESC is slightly higher than the correlation using senior housing overall(see Chart 4). Chart 4:Assisted Living Industry Occupancy Increase(y/y)vs.BKD,CSU and ESC(same store) 4.0% - 3.0% -- 2.0% - 1.0% - AIL i111111110k 0.0% - . - ... :111,111h'ilyr -.111114114Tipoi VOW -2.0% _ . . , _ . \-11 -3.0% 4.0% - OOOOOCO(7) NNNN()()C)C') <tin LC,Li"u)CO CO CO CO N-N N-N Co aO co°O C)O)O Q) O O C)O O O O O O O O O O Assited Living(NIC) ESC -BKD -CSU Source:NIC MAP®Data and Analysis Service Annual rent growth decelerated to +2.8% Rent growth (see Chart 5) measures the weighted annual growth rate of average monthly rent for properties in the top 31 MSAs that reported rents in the current quarter as well as the same quarter a year ago.Weighting is by the number of units in the dominant service type at each property. For independent living(IL)properties, rent growth decelerated 10 basis points to +3.0% in 4Q19 from +3.1% in 3Q19(revised 10 bps upwards). In addition,it was worse than +3.3%a year ago,and was under the 3.2%average growth seen in 3Q15-3Q19. For assisted living(AL) properties, rent was up +2.5%year over year in 4Q19, accelerating from +2.3%in 3Q19 and +2.4%in 2Q19. It is well below+2.9%rent growth seen a year ago.The rent growth continues to be below the +3.5-3.7%peek growth seen in 3Q16-3Q1 7. For senior housing overall(IL and AL combined),rent was up +2.8%year over year in 4Q19,same as in 3Q19(revised 10 bps upwards).The+2.8%rent growth is below the +3-4%growth seen in 2016 and 1 H17,but it is above the +1-2%growth in 2010-2013. Chart 5:Rent Growth(y/y) 4.5% - - - 4.0% - - - 3.5% - _ . .. - 3.0 2.5% - Q_- _ 2.0% - ----- _ _ 1.5% 1.0% - 0.5% „ 1 1 1 1 I 1 r 1 1 ' ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CONNI,-I,-CO CO CO CO0)O)CT)O)OOOO����NNNNMC)C)C)���t�LC) 0 LOLOLU)CO CO COr-r`N I,-CO CO CO CO CT)Cr)0)0) O C)O O O O O O O O O O O C1UN'c 0' 0000'-C 005 0U'ec0Jc010U'c3NU'C00JOUN'Rq-c3UN' UM'0c'cC 0 0UN'c Clc3 0Oc'cCIRg c3c c9,V-°CN'1U0 -Senior Housing IL -AL Source:NIC MAP®Data and Analysis Service ���� Senior Living 110January2020 5 I A BofA GLOBAL RESEARCH Rent growth decelerated 10bps Q/Q in BKD/CSU's key markets For states where BKD and CSU have the most exposure,the rent growth decelerated 10 basis points sequentially in 4Q19,worse than the flat trend for 31 MSAs.In addition,the average +2.4%rent growth was 40 basis points below the growth seen for all 31 MSAs. Senior housing rent growth accelerated 10 basis points in Texas(22%of CSU units,160/o of BKD)and 50 basis points on a quarter over quarter basis in Califomia(15%of BKD units,2%of CSU).It decelerated 110 basis points in Ohio(11%of CSU units,5%of BKD) and was flat in Florida(23%of BKD units, 1%of CSU). On average,rent growth decelerated 10 basis points in 4Q19 for key states where BKD and CSU have the most exposure. BKD,CSU,ESC rent trend hasn't always been consistent with industry The year over year increase in rent at BKD, CSU and ESC over the past few years has not always been consistent with the industry(see Chart 6),although over longer periods of time,they have been directionally consistent. We note that rent growth for BKD and ESC was negatively impacted in 4Q11 by the 11%cut to skilled nursing facility(SNF) Medicare rates. In addition,ESC pricing in 2H13 has been impacted by negative media. Chart 6:Senior Housing Industry Rent Growth(y/y)vs.BKD,CSU and ESC 6.0% 4.0% - --- ---- 1141*k 2.0% - 4,10, .4415,44140\i, 1.0% 0.0% CD CD 0 DCC CD CCD 0 0 o CCCC CD CD CD CD i D DED� Dt�DfJpp>�DfJOCDf�J�DfNDCWDfJCDfNJ DCD>LDCD DCD>LD DfWJDfJ>�D�CD O O O cn V vODOOOD CID CAD(D COOOOO->->-+->NNNNW CO CO CO 4,4,1,4,CJI CT C7I C71OcnOO--1-4 OOCOCOOO CID OO Senior Housing BKD(core pricing) —ESC CSU Source NIC MAP®Data and Analysis Service As noted above,the senior housing category reported by NIC is skewed more towards independent living than units at BKD and CSU.The senior housing category is composed of-46%IL units/45%AL units(AL units includes memory care;remaining 8%are SNFs) versus 33% IL units/62%AL units, including Memory care units for BKD,and 45%IL units/55%AL units including memory care for CSU. However,the historical correlation between the rent growth year over year for assisted living and same store rent growth at BKD,CSU and ESC is only slightly higher than the correlation using senior housing overall (see Chart 7). 6 Senior Living I10 January 2020 ��/� ILC111`t: VY CJL111111JLCl k..i111LCIUUly l)11 1.11CbcpCd..0 Daly BofA GLOBAL RESEARCH Chart 7:Assisted Living Industry Rent Growth(y/y) vs.BKD and ESC 6.0% - -- - 5.0% - - - - - 4.0% - 3.0% 2.0% *411" A1 111111P API 1.0% i 0.0% , , , 1 , , , , , , , , I 1 , , , , 1 , 1 , 1 -1.0% - 4,-4 IV CO 4,-4 IV CO 4,-4 NJ CO 4,-4 IV Co?-4 IV CO. NJ CO 4,- NJ t.)?_>No co- No co. -A.I)Co A- NJ CO A IV CO. IV CO? 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 C7 C7 CD C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 CD CD CD C7 C7 a) V-4 V Co CO CO CO(D(0(O(O O O C)C7-4-4-4-4 N NJ N)NJ CO CO CO CO A A 4,1,(I,(T CT(T CD CD CT 6) ) -) V CO CO CO CO(D(0(0 c0 Senior Housing ESC BKD(core pricing) CS Source:NIC MAP®Data and Analysis Service Annual inventory growth at +2.7%, below demand Inventory growth (see Chart 8) measures year over year growth in the number of units/beds in the top 31 MSAs. For majority independent living(IL) properties, inventory growth remained in the 2% range seen since 4Q16.It was +2.3%in 4Q19,accelerating 30 basis points sequentially from +2.0%in 3Q19(3Q19 revised 20 bps upwards). For majority assisted living(AL) properties,inventory growth was+3.1%year over year in 4Q19,a deceleration from+4.2%in 3Q19.The +5.3%increase seen in 4Q18 was the highest print for the NIC data set which goes back to 4Q06. For senior housing overall(IL and AL combined),inventory growth was +2.7%year over year in 4Q19,decelerating from+3.0%in 3Q19(revised +10 bps),and 90 basis points below the +3.6%in 4Q18.The +2.7%in 4Q19 is below the +3.2%average seen since 4Q16. After three years(2010-2012) of muted construction activity,senior living construction growth picked up in 2013,and continued to accelerate in 2014 through 2017.As a result,Senior living inventory growth has also been accelerating,with the+2.7%in 4Q19 at the upper end of the long-term demand range (2-3%). It generally takes 18-24 months before new construction comes on-line.After accelerating in 2014 and 2015,construction remained relatively stable since 3Q16 which implies that the inventory growth may be stabilizing unless we see another pick up in new construction. �� Senior Living 110January2020 7 BofA GLOBAL RESEARCH Chart 8:Inventory Growth(y/y) 6.0% - 5.0% - 4.0% - 3.0% 2.0% - - ---- 1.0% - - ---- - - 0.0% 1 1 1 I 1 III 1 , I I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I III 1 1 1 1 CO n N-N-N CO CO COa0 CO00 O) )O)C)C)C)C)CD e-- a- - N N N N Cn M Cr)0, V Lo U)U)If)CO CO CO CO N-N f-N CO O CO CO 0)O O)O) O O O O O O O O O O O O O 000000000o0o000000O000O00c0O000O0000000O00000000a00000 -Senior Housing IL -AL Source NIC MAP®Data and Analysis Service,BofA Global Research Construction as 0 of inventory revised higher Construction as a percentage of inventory(see Chart 9) measures the number of units/beds under construction divided by the number of units/beds currently in the market in the top 31 MSAs.The metric should act as a leading indicator of supply growth since it typically takes about two years to complete a new project For majority independent living(IL) properties,construction as a percentage of inventory decelerated to 6.1%of inventory in 4Q19 from 6.2%in 3Q19. It was flat year over year. For majority assisted living(AL) properties,construction as a percentage of inventory was 7.3% in 4Q19,down 30bps from 7.6% in 3Q19,which was revised 30bps higher vs last quarter's report.The 7.3%construction as%of inventory in 4Q19 decelerated from 8.5%in 4Q18 a year ago.The data shows AL construction has accelerated from 2Q14 through 4Q17 when it peaked at 10.0%,and decelerated since then to 7.3%in 4Q19. For senior housing overall (IL and AL combined),construction as a percentage of inventory was 6.7%in 4Q19,down from 6.9%in 3Q19 which was revised 20bps higher vs last quarter's report.We note construction data was revised upward for five of the past ten quarters prior to 4Q19 as shown below. The recent increases have been viewed negatively as the 7%construction is higher than the 2%range observed from 2010 to 2012.The current level is actually above the prior peak in the data set(4-5%in 2007-2008).Construction of 7.8%in 4Q1 7 is the highest construction print in the data set Table 4:Senior housing construction as%of inventory-revisions SH construction as%inventory 2Q17 3Q17 4017 1Q18 2Q18 3018 4Q18 1Q19 2Q19 3Q19 4Q19 as of 3Q19 release 7.2% 7.5% 7.8% 7.5% 7.4% 7.3% 7.1% 7.3% 6.9% 6.7% as of4Q19 release 7.1% 7.4% 7.7% 7.5% 7.4% 7.4% 7.2% 7.4% 7.1% 6.9% 6.7% change -0.1% -0.1% -0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.2% 0.2% Source:NIC MAP®Data and Analysis Service,BofA Global Research We note that before recent highs,construction as a%of inventory peaked at 4.6%in 4Q07 and 1 Q08.The 7.8%in 4Q17 is above the higher end of the 6-7%range seen in the 1990s,which led to oversupply,which in turn has been pressuring occupancy and pricing. Notably,despite of moderating in the last six quarters,AL construction remains at very elevated levels accounting for more than 7%of inventory. 8 Senior Living I 10 January 2020 ��% 11%.111 z. VV w vuiy vat i.Iay BofA GLOBAL RESEARCH Chart 9:Construction as%of Inventory 11.0% - 10.0% , 9.0% 8.0% 7.0% 5.0% - - 4.0% 3.0% - - -- -- 2.0% , -- -. . _ 1.0% tC)CD CO CD CO CO CO(0 CT)0)0)0)O O C) N N N N C)C")C") (0(0 LO(0 CO CO CO CO N-N-N-N-CO CO CO CO Cr)0)Cr)Cr) 00000000000000000 000000000000000000000a000000000000000000000000000a0000000 � NC) NC) NC)��NC) NC'')��N C') NC')�.-N C') NC')�.-N C'r)��N C')sY�N C')��N st�NC') -Senior Housing IL -AL Source:NIC MAP®Data and Analysis Service Top 10 markets account for 49%of all units under construction The construction activity is somewhat concentrated in selected markets with the top 10 MSAs accounting for 49%of the units under construction.This is lower concentration than 53%as of 3Q19. Looking at the construction for senior housing overall (AL and IL combined)Sacramento, CA is at the top of the list,followed by Riverside, CA(previously 3rd)and Atlanta,GA at the third place (previously 2nd). Table 5:MAP 31 markets with the highest Senior housing construction activity in 4Q19 Construction as%of inventory Sacramento,CA 18.3% Riverside,CA 14.1% Atlanta,GA 12.1% Houston,TX 11.8% Denver,CO 9.9% Dallas,TX 8.7% Phoenix,AZ 8.7% St Louis,MO 8.7% Washington,DC 8.6% Miami,FL 8.3% Top 10 Average 10.9% Total 31 Markets 6.7% Source:BofA Global Research,NIC MAP®Data and Analysis Service Looking at the construction for Assisted Living units(AL),St. Louis, MO and Phoenix,AZ have joined the top 10 list,while Boston,MA and Detroit,MI have exited. Table 6:MAP 31 markets with the highest Assisted Living Construction Activity in 4Q19 Construction as% BKD CSU of inventory properties %of Total properties %of Total Riverside,CA 20.9% 9 1.6% 0 0.0% Sacramento,CA 15.3% 6 0.9% 2 1.6% Washington,DC 15.3% 5 0.8% 0 0.0% Miami,FL 13.7% 6 0.9% 1 0.8% Denver,CO 13.2% 18 2.8% 0 0.0% Philadelphia,PA 11.6% 8 1.2% 0 0.0% San Jose,CA 10.0% 1 0.2% 0 0.0% Phoenix,AZ 9.6% 20 3.1% 0 0.0% St Louis,MO 9.1% 3 0.5% 1 0.8% New York,NY 8.3% 8 1.2% 1 0.8% All Primary Markets 7.3% Total exposure 13% 4% Source:BofA Global Research,NIC MAP®Data and Analysis Service ���� Senior Living I 10 January 2020 9 • • BofA GLOBAL RESEARCH IL construction above AL Construction increases have been mostly in AL with the percent of inventory increasing from its trough in 1 Q10 and 2Q10 of 1.9%to its peak of 10.0%in both 3Q16 and 3Q17. Most recently,it decelerated to 7.40/0 in 4Q19. Excluding Continuing Care Retirement Centers(CCRCs),IL construction(11.9%) came in considerably above AL(7.4%),after reversing the trend seen between 3Q10 in 3Q18. IL construction as a percent of inventory continues to accelerate from its trough of 1.5%in 3Q11 to the recent peak seen in 4Q19(120/0).Meanwhile,CCRC construction remains low,at only 2.0%of inventory. As a%of inventory,freestanding Memory care construction decelerated to 5.5%in 4Q19 from 6.5%in 3Q19.We note that the current levels are down from the 9%-12% levels seen from 2013 to 2016. Chart 10:Senior Living Industry-Constniction by campus type:Construction as%of Inventory 12.00% - • 6.00% — - ------ 2.0 0% — 0.00% O� 0o O`° Oo' 00 '`O N% '`� '\� <1' <1, <5 <..5 <O <0 K\ <b <1) <O <°' 0- ,O 0- ,0- 0- ,P 0- 19- 0 tid 0 r1d ti0 0 19- 0 (9- 0 19 0 I4 04 1 - pO tid txd rt0 04 CCRC Independent Living Assisted Living Freestanding Memory Care Source:NIC MAP®Data and Analysis Service Stocks mentioned BofA Ticker Bloomberg ticker Company name Price Rating BKD BKD US Brookdale US$7.14 C-3-9 CSU CSU US Capital Senior Liv in US$3.16 C-3-9 PEAK PEAK US Healthpeak Prop. U S$34.68 B-1-7 VTR VTR US Vedas Inc. U S$56.57 B-2-8 WELL WELL US Welltower US$82.46 B-2-7 Source:BofA Global Research Price objective basis & risk Brookdale Senior Living(BKD) Our$8 price objective is based on 12.1x our 2020 EBITDAR estimate.This is below the historical average (12.5x) given the industry-wide pressures but it is above the trough multiple(9.2x)given the somewhat improving top line growth and improving balance sheet. Given the weak industry backdrop,we believe it will be difficult for the company to show improvement in the near to medium term owing to pressure from new supply coming on line and higher labor costs. Upside risks to our PO are 1) new supply pressures dissipate faster than expected, 10 Senior Living 110 January 2020 0:07 BofA GLOBAL RESEARCH improving BKD's occupancy,pricing and earnings,2) labor costs improve faster than expected.3) better than expected economy driving better than expected demand. Downside risk to our PO are 1)the pressure from new supply is greater than expected.2) high leverage,and 3)operational risk. Capital Senior Living(CSU) Our$4.50 PO is based on 14.3x our 2020E EBITDAR,towards the higher end of the historical valuation range (8x-15x)given the higher than historical asset ownership (64%). It is below the higher end given the industry pressures on occupancy and pricing, combined with labor cost pressures. Upside risks to our PO are: 1) competitive pricing pressures dissipate faster than expected.2) CSU is successful in regaining occupancy.3) Labor costs decelerate. Downside risks to our PO are that the senior living construction continues to accelerate and new assets start to compete with CSU, pressuring occupancy,pricing and earnings. Other risks are high leverage and operational risk. Healthpeak Properties,Inc. (PEAK) Our$39 price objective for Healthpeak is derived using a blended dividend discount model and FFO Multiples.We apply a 23x FFO multiple based to our forward 4Q FFO estimate. In our DDM,we forecast terminal dividend growth of 2.0%and apply a cost of equity of 5.7%. Upside risks to our PO are better-than-expected senior housing,medical office or life science performance,higher-than-forecast dividend growth and lower interest rates. Downside risks to our PO are further public-pay reimbursement cuts,a more competitive acquisitions environment,weaker-than-expected senior housing fundamentals,increased tenant credit risk,and rising interest rates. Ventas, Inc. (VTR) Our$61 price objective is derived using a blended Dividend Discount Model and FFO Multiples.We apply an 15x FFO multiple to our forward four-quarter FFO estimate based on historical and relative multiples.We forecast terminal dividend growth of 1.250/oand apply a 5.7%cost of equity. Downside risks to our price objective are weaker-than- expected senior housing fundamentals,increased tenant credit risk,and rising interest rates. Upside risks to our price objective are better-than-expected senior housing fundamentals,declining interest rates,and lower tenant risk. Welltower(WELL) Our$88 price objective for WELL is derived using a blended dividend discount model FFO Multiple.We apply a 20x FFO multiple based on historical and relative multiples adjusting for relative assumed growth and asset quality.We forecast terminal dividend growth of 2.1%and apply a cost of equity of 5.8%. Upside risks to our PO are better- than-expected senior housing or medical office building performance,higher-than- forecast dividend growth and lower interest rates. Downside risks to our PO are further public-pay reimbursement cuts,a more competitive acquisitions environment,weaker- than-expected senior housing fundamentals,increased tenant credit risk,and rising interest rates. Analyst Certification I,Joanna Gajuk,hereby certify that the views expressed in this research report accurately reflect my personal views about the subject securities and issuers. I also certify that no part of my compensation was, is,or will be,directly or indirectly,related to the specific recommendations or view expressed in this research report. '�/� Senior Living 110 January 2020 11 LI.L.111 Z. ry l.J J lA..l vall{.�.L uul y ull ✓11\.J9.//..aa.�. Uay BofA GLOBAL RESEARCH US-REITs Coverage auster Investment rating Company BofA Ticker Bloomberg symbol Analyst BUY Acadia Realty Trust AKR AKR US Craig Schmidt Alexandria Real Estate Equities ARE ARE US James Feldman American Campus Communities,Inc. ACC ACC US Jeffrey Spector American Homes 4 Rent AMH AMH US Jeffrey Spector Americold Realty Trust COLD COLD US Joshua Dennerlein Armada Hoffler Properties AHH AHH US James Feldman Boston Properties BXP BXP US Jeffrey Spector Brix mor Property Group BRX BRXUS Craig Schmidt Coresite Realty Cap COR COR US Michael J.Funk Cousins Properties Inc. CUZ CUZ US James Feldman CYRUSONEINC CONE CONE US MichaelJ.Funk Digital Realty Trust Inc DLR DLR US Michael J.Funk EastGroup Properties EGP EGP US James Feldmai Equity Commaiwe l h EQC EQC US James Feldmai Equity LteSty le Properties ELS ELS US Jeffrey Spector Equity Residential EQR EQR US Jeffrey Spector Essex Property Trust,Inc. ESS ESS US Jeffrey Spector Extra Space Storage,Inc. EXR EXR US Jeffrey Spector Federal Realty FRT FRT US Jeffrey Spector Getty Realty Corp. GTY GTY US Joshua Dennerlein Healthpeak Properties,Inc. PEAK PEAK US Joshua Dennerlein Hudson Pacific Properties,Inc. HPP HPP US James Feldman Invitation Homes Inc INVH INVH US Jeffrey Spector Kilroy Realty Corporation KRC KRC US James Feldman Kimco Realty KIM KIM US Craig Schmidt National Retail Properties NNN NNN US Joshua Dennerlein OMEGA Healthcare OHI OHI US Joshua Dennerlein Prologis,Inc. PLD PLD US James Feldmai QTS Realty Trust Inc QTS QTS US Michael J.Funk Realty Income 0 0 US Jeffrey Spector Regency REG REG US Craig Schmidt Rexford Industrial Realty REXR REXR US James Feldman Simon Property SPG SPG US Jeffrey Spector SL Green Realty SLG SLG US James Feldman Sun Communities SUI SUI US Joshua Dennerlein UDR,Inc. UDR UDR US Jeffrey Spector VEREIT VER VER US Joshua Dennerlein Vomado Realty VNO VNO US James Feldmai Weingarten Rlty WRI WRI US Craig Schmidt NEUTRAL Apartment Inv estmentand Management Co. AIV AN US Jeffrey Spector AvalonBay Communities Inc AVB AVB US Jeffrey Spector Camden Properly Trust CPT CPT US Jeffrey Spector Corporate Office Properties Trust OFC OFC US James Feldman Douglas Emmett DEI DEI US James Feldman Duke Realty DRE DRE US James Feldmai Empire State Realty Trust ESRT ESRT US James Feldman Highwoods Properties HIW HIW US James Feldman JBG Smith Properties JBGS JBGS US James Feldman Kite Realty Group KRG KRG US Craig Schmidt Life Storage Inc. LSI LSI US Jeffrey Spector Macerich MAC MAC US Jeffrey Spector Paramount Group PGRE PGRE US James Feldman Physicians Realty Trust DOC DOC US Joshua Dennerlein Public Storage,Inc. PSA PSA US Jeffrey Spector Sabra Health Care SBRA SBRA US Joshua Dennerlein Spirit Realty Capital SRC SRC US Joshua Dennerlein Tanger Factory SKT SKT US Craig Schmidt Taubman Centers TCO TCO US Craig Schmidt Ventas,Inc. VTR VTR US Jeffrey Spector Welltower WELL WELL US Joshua Dennerlein UNDERPERFORM American Assets Trust AAT AAT US Craig Schmidt Brandywine Realty BDN BDN US James Feldman 12 Senior Living I 10 January 2020 .�% 11.1..111 2. V V,.a all \.alil\.l V Ul 7 Vil �1i\.Jar.al%l, I./a) BofA GLOBAL RESEARCH US-REITs Coverage Ouster Investment rating Company BofA Ticker Bloomberg symbol Analyst CBL&Associates CBL CBL US Craig Schmidt CubeSmart CUBE CUBE US Jeffrey Spector Diversified Healthcare Trust DHC DHC US Joshua Dennerlein EPR Properties EPR EPR US Joshua Dennerlein Industrial Logistics Properties Trust ILPT ILPT US James Feldman Iron Mountain IRM IRM US Michael J.Funk Lexington Realty Trust LXP LXP US James Feldman Mack-Cali Realty CLI CLI US James Feldman Office Properties Income Trust OPI OPI US James Feldman Retail Opportunity Investments Corp. ROIC ROTC US Craig Schmidt RPT Realty RPT RPT US Craig Schmidt SITE Centers SITC SITC US Craig Schmidt STAG Industrial STAG STAG US James Feldman WP Carey WPC WPC US Joshua Dennerlein RSTR Essential Properties EPRT EPRT US Joshua Dennerlein Medical Properties Trust Inc. MPW MPW US Joshua Dennerlein US-Fadlities,Hospitals and Managed Healthcare Coverage Ouster Investment rating Company BofA Ticker Bloomberg symbol Analyst BUY Acadia Healthcare ACHC ACHC US Kevin Fischbeck,CFA Amedisys,Inc. AMED AMED US Joanna Gajuk Centene Corporation CNC CNC US Kevin Fischbeck,CFA Chemed Corporation CHE CHE US Joanna Gajuk CIGNACorp CI CI US Kevin Fischbeck,CFA DaVita Inc DVA DVA US Kevin Fischbedc,CFA Encompass Health EHC EHC US Kevin Fischbeck,CFA HCA HCA HCA US Kevin Fischbedc,CFA Humana Inc HUM HUM US Kevin Fischbeck,CFA LHC Group,Inc. LHCG LHCG US Joanna Gajuk Magellan Health MGLN MGLN US Kevin Fischbeck,CFA Service Corp.International SCI SCI US Joanna Gajuk Surgery Partners,Inc SGRY SGRY US Kevin Fisdtbedc,CFA UnitedHealth Group UNH UNH US Kevin Fischbeck,CFA Universal Health Services UHS UHS US Kevin Fischbedc,CFA NEUTRAL Anthem AN TM ANTMUS Kevin Fischbeck,CFA Select Medical Corp. SEM SEM US Kevin Fischbeck,CFA Tenet Healthcare THC THC US Kevin Fischbeck,CFA UN DERPERFORM Brookdale Senior Living BKD BKD US Joanna Gajuk Capital Senior Living CSU CSU US Joanna Gajuk Community Health Systems CYH CYH US Kevin Fischbeck,CFA Genesis Healthcare Inc GEN GEN US Joanna Gajuk Mednax MD MD US Kevin Fischbeck,CFA Molina Healthcare,Inc. MOH MOH US Kevin Fischbeck,CFA RVW American Renal ARA ARA US Kevin Fischbedc,CFA �/� Senior Living I 10 January 2020 13 BofA GLOBAL RESEARCH Disclosures Important Disclosures Brookdale(BKD)Price Chart 10-Jan U Gajuk 16-Oct 16-Feb 28-Jun 3-Jan 6-Sep PO:US$12 PO:US$12 PO:US$9.00 PO:US$8.50 PO:US$7.50 PO:US$7.50 US$20 14-Feb j 7-Nov 22-Feb 14-Feb I 1-Oct PO:US$13 PO:11S$10 PO:US$8.00 PO:USS6.50 PO:US$8.00 US$15 US$10 US$5 1-Jan-18 1Jan-19 1-Jan-20 BKD PO B:Buy,N:Neutral,U:Underperform,P0:Price Objective,NA:No longer valid,NR:No Rating The Investment Opinion System is contained at the end of the report under the heading'Fundamental Equity Opinion Key'.Dark grey shading indicates the security is restricted with the opinion suspended. Medium grey shading indicates the security is under review with the opinion withdrawn.Light grey shading indicates the security is not covered.Chart is current as of a date no more than one trading day prior to the date of the report. Capital Senior Livin(CSU)Price Chart 10-Jan B Gajuk 3-May 2-Aug 10-Nov 16-Feb 1-Aug N 3-Jan 9-May PO:US$19 PO:USS18 PO:US$15 PO:US$18 PO:US$17 PO:US$10 PO:US$8.00 PO:US$4.50 US$20 20-Nov j 28-Feb U PO:US$19 PO:US$5.00 US$10 US$0 -1-Jan-18 1-Jan-19 1-Jan-20 CSU PO B:Buy,N:Neutral,U:Underperform,P0:Price Objective,NA:No longer valid,NR:No Rating The Investment Opinion System is contained at the end of the report under the heading'Fundamental Equity Opinion Key'.Dark grey shading indicates the security is restricted with the opinion suspended. Medium grey shading indicates the security is under review with the opinion withdrawn.Light grey shading indicates the security is not covered.Chart is current as of a date no more than one trading day prior to the date of the report. Healthpeak Prop.(PEAK)Price Chart 10-Jan N Sanabria 3-Apr B 18-Aug 1-Dec 16-Feb 9-Jul 9-Nov 25-Jan 21-Jun 6-Sep PO:US$32 PO:US$35 PO:US$33 PO:US$28 PO:US$24 PO:US$28 PO:US$32 PO:US$33 PO:US$36 PO:US$39 US$40 3-Mar 22Sep N 19-Ban i 131npr 14c 2-Aug 11-pc1 PO:US$33 PO:US$31 Po:US$27 PO:US$26 Spe or PO:US$37 Dennerleinl cur B PO:US$25 IV/ US$30 _ ( ,11f US$20 1-Jan-18 1-Jan-19 1-Jan-20 PEAK Restricted MINI PO B:Buy,N:Neutral,U:Underperform,P0:Price Objective,NA:No longer valid,NR:No Rating The Investment Opinion System is contained at the end of the report under the heading'Fundamental Equity Opinion Key'.Dark grey shading indicates the security is restricted with the opinion suspended. Medium grey shading indicates the security is under review with the opinion withdrawn.Light grey shading indicates the security is not covered.Chart is current as of a date no more than one trading day prior to the date of the report. 14 Senior Living 110 January 2020 ���� BofA GLOBAL RESEARCH Ventas Inc(VTR)Price Chart 10-Jan B Spector 3-Apr 22-Sep N 1-Dec 16-Feb 10-Jul 14-Sep 14-Dec 23-Feb 24-May 6-Sep 8-Nov PO:US$69 PO:US$72 PO:US$71 PO:US$70 PO:US$55 PO:US$60 PO:US$62 PO:US$69 PO:USE67 PO:US$67 PO:US$76 PO:US$61 USE80 , On 9-Nov &Marl °21 Jun j274epj I l PO:US$68 PO:USE63 PO:USS66 PO:USE73 P0:USE7'9 ' 19-Jan I26-Mar 11-01 US$70 . PO:USE62 Pb:USE65 PO:US$97 18j0ic,1 PO:US9 4 USS60 i 11No PO:US$68 US$50 US$40 l - 1-Jan-18 1-Jan-19 1-Jan-20 VTR Restricted MIMI PO B:Buy,N:Neutral,U:Underperform,P0:Price Objective,NA:No longer valid,NR:No Rating The Investment Opinion System is contained at the end of the report under the heading'Fundamental Equity Opinion Key'.Dark grey shading indicates the security is restricted with the opinion suspended. Medium grey shading indicates the security is under review with the opinion withdrawn.Light grey shading indicates the security is not covered.Chart is current as of a date no more than one trading day prior to the date of the report. Welltower(WELL)Price Chart 10-Jan N Sanabria 3-Apr 22-Jun 22-Sep 1-Dec 8-Mar 9-Jul 14-Sep 5-Dec 8-Feb 3-May 12-Jul 27-Sep PO:US$67 PO:USE75 PO:USE78 PO:USE77 PO:US$71 PO:USE58 PO:USE64 PO:US$67 Spector PO:US$78 PO:US$78 PO:USE92 PO:US$96 US$100 3-Mar ( 19-Jan 13 Apr I 9-Nov I 8-Mar 17-May I 11-Oct PO:US$72 PO:US$67 PO:US$59 PO:US$701 PO:US$80 PO:US$80 1 Dennedein l USE90 6-Dec i24-May 8-Nov PO:US$75 PO:US$ PO:4$88 US$80 P©US$86 US$70 USE6o US$50 US$40 1-Jan-18 1-Jan-19 1-Jan-20 WELL PO B:Buy,N:Neutral,U:Underperform,P0:Price Objective,NA:No longer valid,NR:No Rating The Investment Opinion System is contained at the end of the report under the heading'Fundamental Equity Opinion Key'.Dark grey shading indicates the security is restricted with the opinion suspended. Medium grey shading indicates the security is under review with the opinion withdrawn.Light grey shading indicates the security is not covered.Chart is current as of a date no more than one trading day prior to the date of the report. Equity Investment Rating Distribution:Health Care Group(as of 31 Dec 2019) Coverage Universe Count Percent Inv.Banking Relationships' Count Percent Buy 154 56.00% Buy 100 64.94% Hold 61 22.18% Hold 37 60.66% Sell 60 21.82% Sell 25 41.67% Equity Investment Rating Distribution:REITs(Real Estate Investment Trusts)Group(as of 31 Dec 2019) Coverage Universe Count Percent Inv.Banking Relationships* Count Percent Buy 47 50.00% Buy 36 76.60% Hold 24 25.53% Hold 21 87.50% Sell 23 24.47% Sell 8 34.78% Equity Investment Rating Distribution:Global Group(as of 31 Dec 2019) Coverage Universe Count Percent Inv.Banking Relationships* Count Percent Buy 1560 50.49% Buy 991 63.53% Hold 717 23.20% Hold 461 64.30% Sell 813 26.31% Sell 415 51.05% *Issuers that were investment banking clients of BofA Securities or one of its affiliates within the past 12 months.For purposes of this Investment Rating Distribution,the coverage universe indudes only stocks.A stock rated Neutral is included as a Hold,and a stock rated Underperform is included as a Sell. ��� Senior Living 110 January 2020 15 LL%.111 "1. •1\.JU11111J1\.1 VM11<V1VMl 1 Vll BofA GLOBAL RESEARCH FUNDAMENTAL EQUITY OPINION KEY:Opinions in dude a Volatiity Risk Rating,an Investment Rating and an Income Rating.VOIA11UTYRISK RATINGS,indicators of potential price fluctuation,are:A-Low,B-Medium and C-High.INVESTMENT RATINGS reflect the analyst's assessment of a stock's:(I)absolute total return potential and(iO attractiveness for investment relative to other stocks within its Coverage Cluster(defined below).There are three investment ratings:1-Buy stocks are expected to have a total return of at least 10%and are the most attractive stocks in the coverage duster,2-Neutral stocks are expected to remain flat or increase in value and are less attractive than Buy rated stocks and 3-Underperform stocks are the least attractive stocks in a coverage duster.Analysts assign investment ratings considering,among otherthigs,the 0-12 month total return expectation for a stock and the firm's guidelines for ratings dispersions(shown in the table below).The current price objective for a stock should be referenced to better understand the total return expectation at any given time.The price objective reflects the analyst's view of the potential price appreciation(depreciation). Investment rating Total return expectation(within 12-month period of dateof initial rating) Ratings dispersion guidelnesfor coveragecluster* Buy Z 10% <_70% Neutral >—0% <_30% Underperform N/A z 20% *Ratings dispersions may vary from time to time where BofA Global Research believes it better reflects the investment prospects of stocks in a Coverage Cluster. INCOME RATINGS,indicators of potential cash dividends,are 7-same/higher(dividend considered to be seare),8-same/lower(dividend not considered to be secure)and 9-pays no cash dividend Coverage Cluster is comprised of stocks covered by a single analyst or two or more analysts sharing a common industry,sector,region or other classification(s).A stock's coverage cluster is included in the most recent BofA Global Research report referencing the stock Price charts for the securities referenced in this research report are available at hops://oricecharts.baml.com or call 1-800-MERRILL to have them mailed. BofAS or one of its affiliates acts as a market maker for the equity securities recommended in the report Brookdale,Capital Senior Livin,Healthpeak Prop.,Ventas Inc,Welltower. BofAS or an affiliate was a manager of a public offering of securities of this issuer within the last 12 months:Healthpeak Prop.,Ventas Inc,Welltower. The issuer is or was,within the last 12 months,an investment banking client of BofAS and/or one or more of its affiliates:Brookdale,Healthpeak Prop.,Ventas Inc,Welltower. BofAS or an affiliate has received compensation from the issuer for non-investment banking services or products within the past 12 months:Brookdale,Healthpeak Prop.,Ventas Inc,Welltower. The issuer is or was,within the last 12 months,a non-securities business client of BofAS and/or one or more of its affiliates: Brookdale,Capital Senior Livin,Healthpeak Prop.,Ventas Inc, Welltower. BofAS or an affiliate has received compensation for investment banking services from this issuer within the past 12 months:Healthpeak Prop.,Ventas Inc,Welltower. BofAS or an affiliate expects to receive or intends to seek compensation for investment banking services from this issuer or an affiliate of the issuer within the next three months:Brookdale, Healthpeak Prop.,Ventas Inc,Welltower. BofAS together with its affiliates beneficially owns one percent or more of the common stock of this issuer.If this report was issued on or after the 9th day of the month,it reflects the ownership position on the last day of the previous month.Reports issued before the 9th day of a month reflect the ownership position at the end of the second month preceding the date of the report Healthpeak Prop.,Welltower. BofAS or one of its affiliates is willing to sell to,or buy from,clients the common equity of the issuer on a principal basis:Brookdale,Capital Senior Livin,Healthpeak Prop.,Ventas Inc,Welltower. The issuer is or was,within the last 12 months,a securities business client(non-investment banking)of BofAS and/or one or more of its affiliates: Brookdale,Healthpeak Prop.,Ventas Inc, Welltower. BofA Global Research personnel(including the analyst(s)responsible for this report)receive compensation based upon,among other factors,the overall profitability of Bank of America Corporation,including profits derived from investment banking.The analyst(s)responsible for this report may also receive compensation based upon,among other factors,the overall profitability of the Bank's sales and trading businesses relating to the class of securities or financial instruments for which such analyst is responsible. Other Important Disclosures From time to time research analysts conduct site visits of covered issuers.BofA Global Research policies prohibit research analysts from accepting payment or reimbursement for travel expenses from the issuer for such visits. Prices are indicative and for information purposes only.Except as otherwise stated in the report,for the purpose of any recommendation in relation to:(i)an equity security,the price referenced is the publicly traded price of the security as of close of business on the day prior to the date of the report or,if the report is published during intraday trading,the price referenced is indicative of the traded price as of the date and time of the report;or(ii)a debt security(including equity preferred and CDS),prices are indicative as of the date and time of the report and are from various sources including BofA Securities trading desks. The date and time of completion of the production of any recommendation in this report shall be the date and time of dissemination of this report as recorded in the report timestamp. Recipients who are not institutional investors or market professionals should seek the advice of their independent financial advisor before considering information in this report in connection with any investment decision,or for a necessary explanation of its contents. Officers of BofAS or one or more of its affiliates(other than research analysts)may have a financial interest in securities of the issuer(s)or in related investments. BofA Global Research policies relating to conflicts of interest are described at httts://rsch.baml.com/coi 'BofA Securities'indudes BofA Securities,Inc('BofAS')and its affiliates.Investors should contact their BofA Securities representative or Merrill Global Wealth Management financial advisor if they have questions concerning this report orconceming the appropriateness of any investment idea described herein for such investor.'BofA Securities'is a global brand for BofA Global Research. Information relating to Non-US affiliates of BofA Securities and Distribution of Affiliate Research Reports: BofAS and/or Merrill Lynch,Pierce,Fenner&Smith('MLPF&S')may in the future distribute,information of the following non-US affiliates in the US(short name:legal name,regulator):Merrill Lynch(South Africa):Merrill Lynch South Africa(Pry)Ltd.,regulated by The Financial Service Board;MLI(UK):Merrill Lynch International,regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority(FCA)and the Prudential Regulation Authority(PRA);BofASE(France):BofA Securities Europe SA is authorized by the Autorite de Contrfle Prudentiel et de Resolution(ACPR)and regulated by the ACPR and the Autorite des Marches Financiers(AMF);BAMLI DAC(Milan):Bank of America Merrill Lynch International DAC,Milan Branch,regulated by the Bank of Italy,the European Central Bank (ECB)and the Central Bank of Ireland(CBI);Merrill Lynch(Australia):Merrill Lynch Equities(Australia)Limited,regulated by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission;Merrill Lynch (Hong Kong):Merrill Lynch(Asia Pacific)Limited,regulated by the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission(HKSFC);Merrill Lynch(Singapore):Merrill Lynch(Singapore)Pte Ltd,regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore(MAS);Merrill Lynch(Canada):Merrill Lynch Canada Inc,regulated by the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada;Merrill Lynch(Mexico): Merrill Lynch Mexico,SA de CV,Casa de Bolsa,regulated by the Comisibn Nacional Bancaria y de Valores;Merrill Lynch(Argentina):Merrill Lynch Argentina SA,regulated by Comision Nacional de Valores;Merrill Lynch(Japan):Merrill Lynch Japan Securities Co.,Ltd.,regulated by the Financial Services Agency;Merrill Lynch(Seoul):Merrill Lynch International,LLC Seoul Branch,regulated by the Financial Supervisory Service;Merrill Lynch(Taiwan):Merrill Lynch Securities(Taiwan)Ltd.,regulated by the Securities and Futures Bureau;DSP Merrill Lynch(India):DSP Merrill Lynch Limited,regulated by the Securities and Exchange Board of India;Merrill Lynch(Indonesia):PT Merrill Lynch Sekuritas Indonesia,regulated by Otoritas Jasa Keuangan(OJK);Merrill Lynch(Israel): Merrill Lynch Israel Limited,regulated by Israel Securities Authority;Merrill Lynch(Russia):000 Merrill Lynch Securities,Moscow,regulated by the Central Bank of the Russian Federation;Merrill Lynch(DIFC):Merrill Lynch International(DIFC Branch),regulated by the Dubai Financial Services Authority(DFSA);Merrill Lynch(Spain):Merrill Lynch Capital Markets Espana,S.A.S.V.,regulated by Comision Nacional del Mercado De Valores;Merrill Lynch(Brazil):Bank of America Merrill Lynch Banco Multiplo S.A.,regulated by Comissao de Valores Mobiliarios;Merrill Lynch KSA Company: Merrill Lynch Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Company,regulated by the Capital Market Authority. This information: has been approved for publication and is distributed in the United Kingdom(UK)to professional clients and eligible counterparties(as each is defined in the rules of the FCA and the PRA)by MLI(UK),which is authorized by the PRA and regulated by the FCA and the PRA-details about the extent of our regulation by the FCA and PRA are available from us on request; has been approved for publication and is distributed in the European Economic Area(EEA)by BofASE(France),which is authorized by the ACPR and regulated by the ACPR and the AMF;has been considered and distributed in Japan by Merrill Lynch(Japan),a registered securities dealer under the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act in Japan,or its permitted affiliates; is issued 16 Senior Living I 10 January 2020 �i�� 11,111 1. V• V41111.1 V LAA7 Vll �LL�.JYV�.LIl\�. 13ll� BofA GLOBAL RESEARCH and distributed in Hong Kong by Merrill Lynch(Hong Kong)which is regulated by HKSFC;is issued and distributed in Taiwan by Merrill Lynch(Taiwan);is issued and distributed in India by DSP Merrill Lynch(India);and is issued and distributed in Singapore to institutional investors and/or accredited investors(each as defined under the Financial Advisers Regulations)by Merrill Lynch (Singapore)(Company Registration No 198602883D).Merrill Lynch(Singapore)is regulated by MAS.Bank of America N.A.,Australian Branch(ARBN 064874 531),AFS License 412901(BANA Australia)and Merrill Lynch Equities(Australia)Limited(ABN 65 006 276 795),AFS License 235132(MLEA)distribute this information in Australia only to'Wholesale'clients as defined by s.761G of the Corporations Act 2001.With the exception of BANA Australia,neither MLEA nor any of its affiliates involved in preparing this information is an Authorised Deposit-Taking Institution under the Banking Act 1959 nor regulated by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority.No approval is required for publication or distribution of this information in Brazil and its local distribution is by Merrill Lynch(Brazil)in accordance with applicable regulations.Merrill Lynch(DIFC)is authorized and regulated by the DFSA.Information prepared and issued by Merrill Lynch(DIFC)is done so in accordance with the requirements of the DFSA conduct of business rules.Bank of America Merrill Lynch International DAC,Frankfurt Branch(BAMLI DAC(Frankfurt)) distributes this information in Germany and is regulated by BaFin,the ECB and the CBI.BofA Securities entities,including BAMLI DACand BofASE(France),mayoutsource/delegate the marketing and/or provision of certain research services or aspects of research services to other branches or members of the BofA Securities group.You may be contacted by a different BofA Securities entity acting for and on behalf of your service provider where permitted by applicable law.This does not change your service provider.Please use this link httti/www.bankofamericacom/emaildisclaimer for further information. This information has been prepared and issued by BofAS and/or one or more of its non-US affiliates.The author(s)of this information may not be licensed to carry on regulated activities in your jurisdiction and,if not licensed,do not hold themselves out as being able to do so.BofAS and/or MLPF&S is the distributor of this information in the US and accepts full responsibility for information distributed to BofAS and/or MLPF&S dients in the US by its non-US affiliates.Any US person receiving this information and wishing to effect any transaction in any security discussed herein should do so through BofAS and/or MLPF&S and not such foreign affiliates.Hong Kong recipients of this information should contact Merrill Lynch(Asia Pacific)Limited in respect of any matters relating to dealing in securities or provision of specific advice on securities or any other matters arising from,or in connection with,this information.Singapore recipients of this information should contact Merrill Lynch(Singapore)Pte Ltd in respect of any matters arising from,or in connection with,this information. General Investment Related Disclosures: Taiwan Readers:Neither the information nor any opinion expressed herein constitutes an offer or a solicitation of an offer to transact in any securities or other financial instrument No part of this report may be used or reproduced or quoted in any manner whatsoever in Taiwan by the press or any other person without the express written consent of BofA Securities. This document provides general information only,and has been prepared for,and is intended for general distribution to,BofA Securities clients.Neither the information nor any opinion expressed constitutes an offer or an invitation to make an offer,to buy or sell any securities or other financial instrument or any derivative related to such securities or instruments(e.g.,options, futures,warrants,and contracts for differences).This document is not intended to provide personal investment advice and it does not take into account the specific investment objectives, financial situation and the particular needs of,and is not directed to,any specific person(s).This document and its content do not constitute,and should not be considered to constitute, investment advice for purposes of ERISA,the US tax code,the Investment Advisers Act or otherwise.Investors should seek financial advice regarding the appropriateness of investing in financial instruments and implementing investment strategies discussed or recommended in this document and should understand that statements regarding future prospects may not be realized.Any decision to purchase or subscribe for securities in any offering must be based solely on existing public information on such security or the information in the prospectus or other offering document issued in connection with such offering,and not on this document Securities and other financial instruments referred to herein,or recommended,offered or sold by BofA Securities,are not insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and are not deposits or other obligations of any insured depository institution(including,Bank of America,N.A.).Investments in general and,derivatives,in particular,involve numerous risks,including, among others,market risk counterparty default risk and liquidity risk No security,financial instrument or derivative is suitable for all investors.In some cases,securities and other financial instruments may be difficult to value or sell and reliable information about the value or risks related to the security or financial instrument may be difficult to obtain.Investors should note that income from such securities and other financial instruments,if any,may fluctuate and that price or value of such securities and instruments may rise or fall and,in some cases,investors may lose their entire principal investment Past performance is not necessarily a guide to future performance.Levels and basis for taxation may change. This report may contain a short-term trading idea or recommendation,which highlights a specific near-term catalyst or event impacting the issuer or the market that is anticipated to have a short-term price impact on the equity securities of the issuer.Short-term trading ideas and recommendations are different from and do not affect a stock's fundamental equity rating,which reflects both a longer term total return expectation and attractiveness for investment relative to other stocks within its Coverage Cluster.Short-term trading ideas and recommendations may be more or less positive than a stock's fundamental equity rating. BofA Securities is aware that the implementation of the ideas expressed in this report may depend upon an investor's ability to'short'securities or other financial instruments and that such action may be limited by regulations prohibiting or restricting'shortselling'in many jurisdictions.Investors are urged to seek advice regarding the applicability of such regulations prior to executing any short idea contained in this report Foreign currency rates of exchange may adversely affect the value,price or income of any security or financial instrument mentioned herein.Investors in such securities and instruments, including ADRs,effectively assume currency risk UK Readers:The protections provided by the U.K regulatory regime,including the Financial Services Scheme,do not apply in general to business coordinated by BofA Securities entities located outside of the United Kingdom. BofAS or one of its affiliates is a regular issuer of traded financial instruments linked to securities that may have been recommended in this report BofAS or one of its affiliates may,at any time, hold a trading position(long or short)in the securities and financial instruments discussed in this report BofA Securities,through business units other than BofA Global Research,may have issued and may in the future issue trading ideas or recommendations that are inconsistent with,and reach different conclusions from,the information presented herein.Such ideas or recommendations may reflect different time frames,assumptions,views and analytical methods of the persons who prepared them,and BofA Securities is under no obligation to ensure that such other trading ideas or recommendations are brought to the attention of any recipient of this information. In the event that the recipient received this information pursuant to a contract between the recipient and BofAS for the provision of research services for a separate fee,and in connection therewith BofAS may be deemed to be acting as an investment adviser,such status relates,if at all,solely to the person with whom BofAS has contracted directly and does not extend beyond the delivery of this report(unless otherwise agreed specifically in writing by BofAS If such recipient uses the services of BofAS in connection with the sale or purchase of a security referred to herein,BofAS may act as principal for its own account or as agent for another person.BofAS is and continues to act solely as a broker-dealer in connection with the execution of any transactions, including transactions in any securities referred to herein. Copyright and General Information Copyright 2020 Bank of America Corporation.All rights reserved.iQprofil&°,iQmethod'are service marks of Bank of America Corporation iQdatabase®is a registered service mark of Bank of America Corporation.This information is prepared for the use of BofA Securities clients and may not be redistributed,retransmitted or disclosed,in whole or in part,or in any form or manner, without the express written consent of BofA Securities.BofA Global Research information is distributed simultaneously to internal and client websites and other portals by BofA Securities and is not publicly-available material.Any unauthorized use or disclosure is prohibited.Receipt and review of this information constitutes your agreement not to redistribute,retransmit,or disclose to others the contents,opinions,conclusion,or information contained herein(including any investment recommendations,estimates or price targets)without first obtaining express permission from an authorized officer of BofA Securities. Materials prepared by BofA Global Research personnel are based on public information.Facts and views presented in this material have not been reviewed by,and may not reflect information known to,professionals in other business areas of BofA Securities,including investment banking personnel.BofA Securities has established information barriers between BofA Global Research and certain business groups.As a result BofA Securities does not disclose certain client relationships with,or compensation received from,such issuers.To the extent this material discusses any legal proceeding or issues,it has not been prepared as nor is it intended to express any legal conclusion,opinion or advice.Investors should consult their own legal advisers as to issues of law relating to the subject matter of this material.BofA Global Research personnel's knowledge of legal proceedings in which any BofA Securities entity and/or its directors,officers and employees may be plaintiffs,defendants,co-defendants or co-plaintiffs with or involving issuers mentioned in this material is based on public information.Facts and views presented in this material that relate to any such proceedings have not been reviewed by,discussed with,and may not reflect information known to,professionals in other business areas of BofA Securities in connection with the legal proceedings or matters relevant to such proceedings. This information has been prepared independently of any issuer of securities mentioned herein and not in connection with any proposed offering of securities or as agent of any issuer of any securities.None of BofAS any of its affiliates or their research analysts has any authority whatsoever to make any representation or warranty on behalf of the issuer(s).BofA Global Research policy prohibits research personnel from disclosing a recommendation,investment rating,or investment thesis for review by an issuer prior to the publication of a research report containing such rating,recommendation or investment thesis. Any information relating to the tax status of financial instruments discussed herein is not intended to provide tax advice or to be used by anyone to provide tax advice.Investors are urged to ���� Senior Living 110 January 2020 17 1 t�.111 1. V V 1.J J11.1 �..111,.1V\117 V11 V11�.JU V�.ll1.�. 11K� BofA GLOBAL RESEARCH seek tax advice based on their particular circumstances from an independent tax professional. The information herein(other than disclosure information relating to BofA Securities and its affiliates)was obtained from various sources and we do not guarantee its accuracy.This information may contain links to third-party websites.BofA Securities is not responsible for the content of any third-party website or any linked content contained in a third-party website.Content contained on such third-party websites is not part of this information and is not incorporated by reference.The inclusion of a link does not imply any endorsement by or any affiliation with BofA Securities.Access to any third-party website is at your own risk and you should always review the terms and privacy policies at third-party websites before submitting any personal information to them.BofA Securities is not responsible for such terms and privacy policies and expressly disclaims any liability for them. All opinions,projections and estimates constitute the judgment of the author as of the date of publication and are subject to change without notice.Prices also are subject to change without notice.BofA Securities is under no obligation to update this information and BofA Securities ability to publish information on the subject issuer(s)in the future is subject to applicable quiet periods.You should therefore assume that BofA Securities will not update any fact,circumstance or opinion contained herein. Subject to the quiet period applicable under laws of the various jurisdictions in which we distribute research reports and other legal and BofA Securities policy-related restrictions on the publication of research reports,fundamental equity reports are produced on a regular basis as necessary to keep the investment recommendation current Certain outstanding reports or investment opinions relating to securities,financial instruments and/or issuers may no longer be current Always refer to the most recent research report relating to an issuer prior to making an investment decision. In some cases,an issuer may be classified as Restricted or may be Under Review or Extended Review.In each case,investors should consider any investment opinion relating to such issuer(or its security and/or financial instruments)to be suspended or withdrawn and should not rely on the analyses and investment opinion(s)pertaining to such issuer(or its securities and/or financial instruments)nor should the analyses or opinion(s)be considered a solicitation of any kind.Sales persons and financial advisors affiliated with BofAS or any of its affiliates may not solicit purchases of securities or financial instruments that are Restricted or Under Review and may only solicit securities under Extended Review in accordance with firm policies. Neither BofA Securities nor any officer or employee of BofA Securities accepts any liability whatsoever for any direct,indirect or consequential damages or losses arising from any use of this information. 18 Senior Livings 10 January 2020 0-0; Item 4:Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: Planning Administration Sent: Friday, February 28, 2020 9:31 AM To: William R. Landfair Subject: FW: Opposition to Westminster Canterbury expansion Bill, Here is another email of opposition, received in the Planning Admin inbox on 2/28/2020. Ai13Marchelle L. Coleman, City Planner II City of Virginia Beach Virginia Beach Planning & Community Development 2875 Sabre Street, Suite 500 Virginia Beach, VA 23452 (757) 385-8557 (Direct) (757) 385-4621 (Office) mcoleman@vbaov.com From: Lisa Annunziato<annunziatolj@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, February 28, 2020 7:28 AM To: dredmondvbpc@icloud.com Subject: Opposition to Westminster Canterbury expansion This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach.Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Planning Commission Member Redmond, I'm writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed Westminster Canterbury tower and expansion project. As you well know,the area surrounding the proposed project is primarily a residential area with most buildings no taller than 4-5 stories. 1 11G111 Y. WV GJ J IGl VQ111G1UU1 y Vll V11CJ0.pCQAC L0.y To allow construction of a business building of that size, and make no mistake, they are a business, with the associated traffic and noise will be an ongoing issue for the current tax paying citizens of the area. The roads are ill equipped to accommodate the increase in staff and resident vehicles if you allow this project to proceed.Traffic will be affected for many blocks, quite possibly impeding smooth travel to the Oceanfront, and the tourist dollars that come with those visitors. The proposed building materials will create nothing but energy problems for nearby residents. Additionally, detrimental effects to the environment will be felt for blocks. Significant modifications must be required to protect the environment, and the nearby residents. Exhaust from the proposed loading dock, adjacent to a residential building, may very well violate EPA indoor air quality standards. Emergency service personnel are already stretched thin, to further tax those resources will put us all at risk. I urge you to deny variances which will destroy this community.The requests of one business should not supersede the needs of your current constituents. Sincerely, Lisa Annunziato 2420 Ocean Shore Crescent#301 Virginia Beach VA 23451 Lisa Annunziato Sent from Gmail Mobile 2 2/19/2020 Steven Annunziato 2420 Ocean Shore Cres, Unit 301 Virginia Beach,VA 23451 Virginia Beach City Council 281 City Hall Virginia Beach, VA 23456 SUBJECT: Concerns for Westminster Canterbury Expansion Plans Dear Planning Commission Member: I would like to bring to your attention a concern regarding the Westminster Canterbury (WC) senior living facility (SLF) expansion plans relative to Virginia Beach's current supply. Early last week I was listening to an investment manager discuss Real Estate Investment Trusts and the oversupply in the SLF market. I have attached a Merrill Lynch report, "Senior Living 4Q19 industry data points to continued softness- we remain cautious", please see attached. In the research report, page #3 chart #2 and table #1, describes the state of the industry and the negative occupancy trend. The analyst summarizes the environment on page #1, "Inventory growth above near-term demand growth." WC proposed expansion includes a variance to increase the number of units available. When taken in context of an oversupply of SLF, the variance is extremely concerning for local properties and their related property values. A glut of shore properties could create a vacuum whereby property values reprice in a mark to market cascade for the surrounding communities. The event risk becomes more probable because of the timing of the construction relative to the late stage of our economic cycle. An additional complicating factor regarding the extensive expansion is how this could create instability in the regional SNF market, particularly during times of economic stress, such as a recession. Should the overdevelopment create an oversupply, other facilities could be operationally challenged, creating possible loan service issues and ensuing market instability. Therefore, because of the far reaching impact of this project, I would propose the City Council seek comment from other Virginia Beach SLF providers to the impact on their business operations and the stability of the SLF service. I hope you have found the information valuable. Thank you for considering my concerns. Respectfully Steven Annunziato Item 4:Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: sa3225@outlook.com Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 10:40 PM To: William R. Landfair Subject: FW: Concerns regarding scope of Westminster Canterbury Expansion Attachments: Concerns to Virginia Beach Planning Commission regarding Westminster Can....docx; Merrill Lynch Senior Living 4Q19 Industry Data Points to Continued Softn....pdf ICAUTION•This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Mr. Landfair: Please note for your records my concerns regarding the scope and timing of the Westminster Canterbury expansion which was communicated to the planning commission and city on February 20`h I would also like to mention the upcoming public meeting with the city planning public board is very ill-timed, due to the recent COVID-9 concerns. I would recommend the public hearing be postponed at least sixty days until we exit the peak period of concern for transmission. Importantly, several senior residents are concerned about attending a public forum which will be very crowded. Thank you for your attention and consideration. a°M.7164ge 732-337-8684 From: sa3225@outlook.com [mailto:sa3225@outlook.com] Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2020 7:54 AM To: 'galcarazbpc@icloud.com'; 'wgrahamnVBPC@icloud.com'; 'horsley_don@yahoo.com'; 'mainman@inmanstrickler.com'; 'branch.oliver@gmail.com'; 'dredmondVBPC@icloud.com'; 'johnhcoston@gmail.com'; 'rjrklein@gmail.com'; 'jckwall@aol.com'; 'dweiner@bachelderbrick.com' Subject: Concerns regarding scope of Westminster Canterbury Expansion Members of our Planning Commission: Please see the attached letter regarding my concerns related to the Westminster Canterbury Expansion. 1 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Thank you /4° a...744) . 732-337-8684 2 item 4: vv estminster anterDury on Lnesapeaxe nay William R. Landfair From: Diane M. Bray <dianebray1919@gmail.corn> Sent: Friday, March 6, 2020 8:09 AM To: City Council; branch.oliver@gmail.com; Planning Administration; William R. Landfair; paulterkeltaub@me.com Subject: OPPOSITION TO WCCB CURRENT EXPANSION PLANS CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach.Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. The proposed renderings of the WCCB expansion remain an eye sore to surrounding neighbors and beach dwellers. Further, it may impede military exercises and require changes to flight training which may negatively impact other neighborhoods in the area. The height of this building will adversely contribute to increased traffic, accidents and road congestion.The current infrastructure simply cannot handle the large influx of residents. In an environment with demands open and transparency, where are the studies showing the potential impact to the shoreline, beach wildlife, wind changes and electricity/solar demands? In selecting the Cape Story/Cape Henry area, we did so because of the small town appeal that did not include large towering condos that disrupt the natural beauty of the shoreline. I fully support a review with impact statements of this current expansion. Consideration should be given to buildings that are no taller than those currently located on the property. Diane M. Bray Sent from Mail for Windows 10 1 item 4: W estminster Canterbury on unesapeaxe tray William R. Landfair From: bay5558@aol.com Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2020 12:55 PM To: Bob M. Dyer; James L.Wood;Jessica Abbott; Michael Berlucchi; Barbara Henley; Louis R.Jones;John Moss; Aaron R. Rouse; Guy K.Tower; Sabrina D.Wooten; Rosemary C. Wilson; William R. Landfair Cc: galcarazbpc@icloud.com;wgrahamnVBPC@icloud.com; horsley_don@yahoo.com; mainman@inmanstrickler.com; branch.oliver@gmail.com; dredmondvbpc@icloud.com;johnhcoston@gmail.com; rjklein@gmail.com;jckwall@aol.com; dweiner@bachelderbrick.com Subject: Westminster Canterbury Hearing CAUTION This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear VA Beach Offical, I would like to express my concern and opposition to the proposed plan for the Westminster Canterbury expansion. I am a full-time resident and owner of a condo at Ships Watch on Ocean Shore. I specifically purchased at this location because it was a relatively quiet area with low traffic where I could walk my dog and enjoy the beach. I fear this project will detrimentally change everything in our little community. Yesterday I watched a Sysco tractor-trailer truck trying to make a delivery to the loading dock of Westminster. It barely fit on StarFish and had to turn onto Ocean Shore and back into the WC drive, meanwhile holding up traffic in both directions when a Chesbay Distributing truck arrived and had to park on Ocean Shore in front of Casa Playa and unload on the street, also holding up traffic. What will this all look like if this business is allowed to double in size and residences with visitors, along with supply deliveries and medical trucks?? The cramped corner of StarFish and Ocean Shore is ALREADY too congested!! WC just finished a 2 1/2 year addition of an exterior porch that created blowing dust, mud, a great deal of extra noise, workers taking up all the parking and tossing cigarettes and lunch wrappers on the street. Another, even lengthier construction time will mean a larger noise factor with bulldozer type equipment, dump trucks..., pounding, drilling, hammering, diesel emissions and hundreds of construction people in a one-block area! I am also concerned about the beach. 22 stories WILL block sunlight, reflect heat and wind onto our neighboring condominiums. The general public will not be able /allowed access near the LH Pier, giving WC, in essence, a PRIVATE BEACH, forcing the public east which will become overcrowd like Chics or Ocean Park beaches. I imagine with the construction and changes in the landscape and drainage during and after this proposed project, the beach /sand will suffer. VA Beach just spent a lot of money on the Lynnhaven Shores sand replenishment (don't want to go through that again). All the construction and added weight to the edge of the beach can't help but affect it. Our little area can't and shouldn't accept this huge project. Don't just see $ signs of tax revenue, Please Vote NO on the expansion in this location. Thank you, Lauri Brew 2476 Ships Watch Ct Virginia Beach VA 23451 bay5558@aol.com i item 4: vv estminster uanteroury on t nesapeaxe nay William R. Landfair From: Planning Administration Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2020 2:44 PM To: William R. Landfair Subject: FW: Westminster Canterbury Expansion Project Bill, See email below received in the Planning Admin Inbox on 3/10/2020. ABMarchelle L. Coleman, City Planner II City of Virginia Beach Virginia Beach Planning 8. Community Development 2875 Sabre Street, Suite 500 Virginia Beach, VA 23452 (757) 385-8557 (Direct) (757) 385-4621 (Office) mcoleman@vbqov.com From:Tom Briggum <briggum@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, March 10, 2020 8:21 AM To:galcarazvbpc@icloud.com; wgrahamVBPC@icloud.com; horsley_don@yahoo.com; mainmain@inmanstrickler.com; branch.oliver@gmail.com; dredmondvbpc@icloud.com;johnhcoston@gmail.com; rjrklein@gmail.com;jckwall@aol.com; dweiner@batchelder-brick.com Subject: Westminster Canterbury Expansion Project CAU i ION This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. My wife and I have been residents of Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay for almost two years now, and the experience has been incredible. It's the perfect place to be at this time in our lives, and it's one of the best-run organizations I've ever been associated with. 1 item 4: vv estminster Lanteroury on Lnesapeaxe h a) The facility is always 90+ percent occupied and future demand has been made clear by national studies naming Virginia Beach as one of the three areas in the US most in need of senior housing. This project will bring new jobs to Virginia Beach. WC provides jobs for over 400 people now and this expansion will increase that by 50 percent. Hundreds of workers will be needed to complete the construction. Westminster Canterbury has always been a good neighbor to the people on Shore Drive. By constructing this building in a way that will minimize its environmental and community impact, we will continue to be that good neighbor. I ask that you approve this project. Virginia Beach is a national leader in good places to live and this expansion keeps us moving in that direction. Tom Briggum 3100 Shore Drive Apartment 956 2 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: Paul Cascio <pjciii3@aol.com> Sent: Sunday, March 8, 2020 1:31 PM To: William R. Landfair Subject: Fwd: Concerns regarding Expansion of Westminister Canterbury CAUTION'This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From: pjciii3@aol.com To: bdyer@vbgov.com, jlwood@vbgov.com, Jabbott@vbgov.com, mberlucc@vbgov.com, bhenley@vbgov.com, Lrjones@vbgov.com, jdmoss@vbgov.com, arouse@vbgov.com, gtower@vbgov.com, rcwilson@vbgov.com, Swooten@vbgov.com, galcarazbpc@icloud.com, wgrahamVBPC@icloud.com, horsley_don@yahoo.com, mainman@inmanstrickler.com, branch.oliver@gmail.com, dredmondVBPC@icloud.com, johnhcoston@gmail.com, rjrklein@gmail.com, jckwall@aol.com, dweiner@batchelder-brick.com Cc: paulterkeltaub@me.com, msykesl@cox.net Sent: 2/28/20 12:21:50 Eastern Standard Time Subject: Concerns regarding Expansion of Westminister Canterbury We have been owners and residents of Ocean Shore Condominiums for almost 20 years. We have been pleased to be neighbor to Westminster Canterbury over that period. We have seen a number of our neighbors over that period move into the facility as they could not continue live independently and each of them seemed to be very happy there. We were pleased with past expansions of the facility, recognizing the importance of Westminster Canterbury to meet the needs of the community. We however are shocked with the proposal that they are making for the next expansion. It is unacceptable and we ask you to deny them permission to expand according to the current plan. A 22 story glass building on Shore Drive on the Bay right next to our complex will change the character of our development and of the neighborhood. Are they kidding? It will destroy views for many of our buildings. It will create further problems with noise, wind and loss of sand. There will be a significant loss in our investment in our property. The building should be no higher than the current buildings and made of brick to match the existing buildings. And it should be built further away from our property than proposed. As proposed, our community would be barraged by noise from the generator, tower loading dock, trash collection, fire room and water room. Also, moving the beach access the the edge of our building will make it very difficult for the public to have access to the beach in front of their facility. It is not their private beach. It needs to be kept where it is or moved a little west if needed to meet their development plans. The development along Ocean Shore Ave was very controversial originally and the principle was established to maintain public access to the entire beach. 1 1I...111-I. V V JCl.1 ' ,CC111.\.1UItI7 till u111.Jaf%.Cl1.\l. 1Ju7 Finally, the parking/traffic situation needs to be addressed. The public cannot access the beach if the limited parking on Starfish Rd and Ocean Shore Ave is filled by the staff and visitors to Westminster Canterbury. The parking problem was eased when they began using the parking lot in front of the closed Lynnhaven Fish House for staff. This development would put all those cars back on the street, denying public access to the public beach. We demand that permission not be given to proceed with this development as proposed. Paul and Rita Cascio Greg, TJ and Valerie Cascio 2420-201 Ocean Shore Crescent 2 ACID'i: VVCSuilnSier Lilian ouIy Un I.d1CSapCaKe Da) Deborah M.Casey,CCAL® 757.446.8600-tel 757.446.8670-fax VANIiE\TENTER BLACK J1 LLP Licensed in Virginia 101 W. Main Street • 500 World Trade Center • Norfolk,VA 23510 • 0: 757.446.8600 • F: 757.446.8670 February 13, 2020 VIA EMAIL Virginia Beach Planning Commission Re: Applicant: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Modification of Conditions Dear Board Members: This law firm represents Lesner Pointe East Condominium Association, Inc. ("Lesner Pointe East"), which is located on Shore Sands Court off Page Avenue, to the west of Westminster Canterbury. Lesner Pointe East consists of 42 units in 5 three-story buildings located adjacent to the beach on the Chesapeake Bay. We write to express concerns with the Modification of Conditions Application submitted on behalf of Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay. Specifically, 1. The proposed 22-story tower is almost double the height of any other building on the Bay. It will eclipse many existing buildings along the corridor, including Lesner Pointe East. 2. A 22-story structure will block and detract from scenic views and vistas in the corridor. 3. The location of the building on the property should be set back as far from the water as possible. 4. There is concern with the increased traffic and flow. Lesner Pointe East shares the concerns of its neighbors along the corridor that the sheer height of the proposed tower will set a high rise precedent that overshadows other structures, is inconsistent with and detracts from the existing structures, impedes scenic views and vistas, and creates traffic problems and hazards. Lesner Pointe East suggests that a building not taller than the current Westminster Canterbury structure be permitted to maintain the character of and views along the corridor. Your consideration is greatly appreciated. Sincerel , Deborah M. Casey DMC/ps c: Board of Directors (via email) 4849-7254-5458,v. 1 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: MEYER CHOVITZ <mchovitz@cox.net> Sent: Sunday, March 8, 2020 9:08 PM To: William R. Landfair Subject: Westminster Canterbury buildings CAUTION.This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach.Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. 2424 Ocean Shore Cres. #402 Virginia Beach,VA 23451 Mayor City of Virginia Beach/City Council/Planning Commission I am an owner of an Ocean Shore Condominium and I am greatly concerned about the proposed buildings by Westminster Canterbury for many reasons. One reason is fire. They wish to building a building that is too tall for the use it is intended. They are proposing that it will be 22 stories high. I understand that by law only 14 stories are allowed for such use. The people that are moving in will be older and will not be able to escape easily. The firefighters will have a terrible time. I'm sure that no equipment is available to the fire departments that can reach that height. Also, what about rescue, health, and emergency evacuation of people who may have a heart attack or are physically unable to move quickly? Think about the traffic that will develop with more people moving in, as well as more street parking spaces being needed.The streets will not be able to accommodate all of this. Please check into this more closely before it goes any further. My wife and I are opposed to your allowing these buildings to be built. Yours truly, Mary Chovitz (owner) 1 le.,111 1. •1\.J V...17 V11 V11V..041./V..41\... ilLLJ Meyer Chovitz(owner) March 8, 2020 2 T. rr.) ow• ' CI1iLa.ivuir v.. Lay William R. Landfair From: tccohoon@cox.net Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 11:30 PM To: City Council; branch.oliver@gmail.com; Planning Administration;William R. Landfair Cc: Todd Solomon; capestory@sybercom.net Subject: Westminster Canterbury CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach.Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Ms. Oliver and Planning Commission Members and City Council Members, I formally request that the Planning Commission"DENY" the subject request from Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay (WCCB) for a modification of conditions to build a 4 story parking garage with 22 story tower senior living facility and a 7 story memory unit facility connected by enclosed elevated pedestrian bridges over public roadways. For the following reasons: • It is in violation of the Shore Drive Overlay density restrictions and the Business 901 height restrictions. Density requirements are maximum 24 units per acre. (The proposed 22-story tower will be approximately 250' tall and have approximately 272 units) • It is in violation of City Code, Appendix A—Zoning, ARTICLE 9, Section 901, Senior Housing is limited to a height of 165 feet. A housing for seniors and disabled persons or handicapped, including convalescent or nursing; maternity homes; day-care centers other than covered under permitted principal uses herein above, provided that the maximum height shall not exceed one hundred sixty-five (165) feet; (The independent living tower in the proposed project significantly exceeds this limitation at 250'). • Wind Scour: The close proximity between the Ocean Shore Condos (OSC) and Westminster Canterbury (WC) site increases the local wind speed, wind scour and turbulence between these Bayfront buildings resulting in more drifting sand, damaged vegetation and damage to the roofing of the westernmost OSC buildings. • Stormwater run-off: There is no indication of stormwater retention on the preliminary drawings or how the stormwater requirements are to be met. • Beach Access: keep the beach access where it is or at least on their property and not next to Ocean Shore Condos. The way the beach access is being planned Westminster Canterbury will be creating a private beach for their residents that the public will not be able to access. • Infrastructure support: there will be additional traffic on Shore Drive, Starfish Rd, and Ocean Shore Avenue and there are no indications on how those needs will be addressed. i ...... .. ... ... ...I ... . ... .r,»... .,.� Furthermore, I feel that this project would also set a harmful precedent for future development requests of high density tower structures in Business B2 and B4 zoning that would be incompatible with the surrounding residential and lower density multi-family dwellings that make the Shore Drive Corridor unique. In conclusion, I understand that it's the Planning Commission responsibility to review projects and determine if they are in accordance with existing City codes and to allow variances based on hardships. The proposed project is considered multi-family senior living housing that violates City codes and Westminster Canterbury has no hardships. Additionally, Virginia Beach City could be opening itself up to litigation. Thank you for your consideration in denying the subject application, Chris Cohoon Resident and homeowner at 2267 Walke St, Virginia Beach, VA 23451 2 iiciii-i. vv cauiiiiiict k.am.ci vui y uu %-A,caapcarcc Lay William R. Landfair From: Lisa Conner <lisaodc@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 10:38 AM To: William R. Landfair Subject: Westminster Canterbury CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Mr. Landfair, We are writing to you to express our opposition to the proposed expansion of Westminster Canterbury. Ours has always been a quiet beach community and we have all purchased our homes here with that in mind. This building extravaganza would totally change our peaceful community in many ways. The environmental impacts would negatively affect the natural beach ecosystem. The 22 story building would shade the beach and create an undesirable atmosphere in this area. The glass walls would reflect huge amounts of ultraviolet sunlight thereby raising the temperatures of surrounding area. The entire building itself would act to create wind tunnels on each side of building. When we have a typical storm the winds directly on the beach are tremendously strong. This will damage property to each side of the building by further increasing the wind field and velocity. Why cannot the building locations be changed so that the taller tower is closer to original building. If the height of the building was in line with the rest of the property the negative aspects of this proposal would be lessened.That would be 14 floors not 2211111 Our beach is directly in the bird migration pattern. Glass walls would ultimately end up killing large numbers of migratory birds. In addition, noise would be greatly increased in our quiet community with generators, delivery trucks, emergency vehicles and increase in residents, visitors and staff. The proposed parking ramp is so steep that you cannot see a car coming at you and we doubt that elderly people would be able to safely use it. We urge you to carefully consider this proposal and these alternatives. Please put the wishes and needs of current residents above an overreaching plan to permanently change and damage our beautiful beachfront community. Respectfully, George and Elizabeth Conner 2434 Ships Watch Ct Virginia Beach, Virginia 23451 1 ------ -. - ---- ------------I --- ---"----r------ ---/ Re: Westminster Canterbury's Request for a Variance We live in Ships Watch Condos east of Westminster Canterbury. Our neighborhood and the many other condos located along Shore Drive enjoy a quiet residential lifestyle and the local bay access to a wonderful beach. One of my many concerns is the overburdening of traffic on Shore Drive. We have many cars now and with the large new development east of Great Neck Road and the Senior Housing apartments near the Lesner Bridge plus the Bayfront condos behind the Senior Housing will bring additional cars to Shore Drive. Also,there are some housing developments on the west side of the Lesner Bridge. This will be a huge burden for our neighbors commuting to and from work. Another concern I have is with the height of the 22 story Senior Tower. Will the variance they are requesting change the neighborhood and set a precedence for taller buildings to be built? The Virginia Beach Code for development in our area is substantial and we see no reason to give a variance to Westminster Canterbury. They now have 14 story buildings and should stay with their attractive original architecture. This is to be Senior Housing with independent living, assisted and disabled seniors. How are seniors in varying degrees of health going to handle emergencies in a 22 story Tower if and when the elevators are shut down? It would be difficult in a 14 story tower. Also, the residential garage for these seniors is going to have very steep ramps (4 stories high) between the floors and those seniors driving up are not going to be able to see if someone is driving down because of these steep ramps. Quite dangerous for anyone. Virginia Beach is presenting itself as a beach focused city that has lots of sunny beaches. This tall tower will certainly cast a large shadow over our Bayfront beach much of the day and will be a negative for Virginia Beach's future especially if other developers request variances and the city approves them. This would be very detrimental to the future of the Virginia Beach Bayfront communities. I hope our Planning Board and the Virginia Beach City Council take these thoughts with them when they vote on this variance. Westminster Canterbury can keep being a good neighbor by limiting their building to 14 stories—the same as their other brick buildings and continue to keep their brick architecture for this new building which fits into our area instead of what they have envisioned—a modern glass building right in the middle of the Atlantic Flyway for Migratory Birds. Pity the birds. Thank you for your attention to this important matter. Bob and Carol Connolly 2426 Ships Watch Court Virginia Beach,VA 23451 757-496-1043 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: Howie Cronauer <hcronauer@cox.net> Sent: Sunday, March 8, 2020 2:29 PM To: galcarazbpc@icloud.com;wgrahamnVBPC@icloud.com; horsley_don@yahoo.com; mainman@inmanstrickler.com; branch.oliver@gmail.com; dredmondvbpc@icloud.com;johnhcoston@gmail.com; rjrklein@gmail.com;jckwall@aol.com; dweiner@batchelder-brick.com Cc: 'Howie Cronauer'; 'Doug McNeil'; 'Paul Terkeltaub'; 'Tot Sykes'; Rick Little Subject: Inaccurate information in Planning Commission report on the Westminster Canterbury Expansion Project Members of the Planning Commission: Page 8 of your report concerning the proposed expansion indicates that "staff has received one letter in support and eight letters in opposition." I feel this statement is misleading and does not reflect the angst and concerns of the citizens who live in the immediate area that will be impacted by this expansion. I know that a significant number of letters/emails have been sent to the individual members of the Planning Commission. Stating that only eight letters were addressed to the Planning Commission is not a transparent representation of the concerns that have been expressed. I request that this statement be corrected to specify it only reflects letters to the Commission. In addition,the report should also be modified to indicate the number of letters/emails received by the individual members of the Commission. Failure to include the total number of letters received conveniently hides the concerns of the citizens of Virginia Beach. Thank you for your consideration. Howie Howie Cronauer 757 613 7773 1 item 4: w estminster Lanteroury on Lnesapeaxe tsa *ION AI CI1 I 11 , I c Ocean Shore Condominium (OSC) and other area property owner's concerns re: Westminster Canterbury on the Chesapeake Bay expansion. 03/05/20 — Ocean Shore. Condominium (OSC) and other area property owner's concerns re: Westminster Canterbury on the Chesapeake Bay (WC) expansion plans. 1. FYI,in accordance with the City Zoning Code,WC needs a Conditional Use Permit from the City to build on the Casa del Playa and Lynnhaven Fishing Pier sites. The underlying zoning classification for these sites is B-4. 2. FYI, the lots abutting Casa del Playa and Lynnhaven Fishing Pier sites are also zoned B-4, thus none of the residential zone restrictions apply to this site. 3. All WC parcels are within the boundaries of the City's Shore Drive Corridor Overlay District. Required: Comply with those commendation for size and scale of the new WC buildings. 4. A 4+story parking garage has been proposed to provide the required parking similar to the existing WC parking garage at the west side of the site. To fit the site, some very tight and awkward turning movements, ramps and traffic drive aisles are proposed for the garage. Thus the attractiveness to WC residents of covered parking is reduced taking additional parking from Ocean Shore Ave. Required: Reduce the height of the tower, thus reducing the units served by parking spaces required to meet code. 5. The traffic light at Shore Drive and Starfish Road doesn't address traffic issues caused by the new buildings. Required: Perform a Traffic Study. 6. City Code,Appendix A-Zoning, ARTICLE 9, Section 901, Senior Housing is limited to a height of 165 feet. "Housing for seniors and disabled persons or handicapped, including convalescent or nursing; maternity homes; day-care centers other than covered under permitted principal uses herein above, provided that the maximum height shall not exceed one hundred sixty-five (165) feet;" The independent living tower in the proposed project significantly exceeds this limitation. Required: reduce the height of the tower to comply. 7. Tower: Proposed independent living tower needs modification in accordance with adjacent property owners' concerns: a. Incompatible with City's Shore Drive Corridor Overlay District. This wasn't addressed in the planning staff's comments. b. Beach shading: The tower casts a long shadow across the Chesapeake Bay beach in front of OSC from 1:30 PM to 6:00 PM. Required: move the tower away from the Chesapeake Bay and closer to the western side of the Casa del Playa site. c. Chesapeake Bayfront scale and livability: The tower sets an unwelcome precedence DLM Architects Design Review Memo No. 3 03/05/20 605 Thalia Point Rd., Virginia Beach, VA 23452 davidm@dlmarchs.com Page - 1 11�.111 A.. ..V.O. J lbl \JUL" M1 V1.11 J Vll J 1.711. f f\I \( 'l l I I I ( . I ) Ocean Shore Condominium (OSC) and other area property owner's concerns re: Westminster Canterbury on the Chesapeake Bay expansion. for the height of other developable properties along the Bayfront. d. Wind Scour: The close proximity between the OSC and WC site increases the local wind speed,wind scour and turbulence between these Bayfront buildings resulting in more drifting sand, damaged vegetation and damage to the roofing of the westernmost OSC buildings. Required: Construct wind breaks at the dune line. This wasn't addressed in the planning staff's comments. e. Reflective Glass Hazard: According to preliminary drawings prepared by WC's architect, approximately 80% of the exterior walls on the east, south and west walls of the tower are proposed to be floor-to-ceiling reflective glass (some walls are depicted as all glass). This reflective characteristic increases the solar radiation (heat) reflected from WC windows toward the east and south onto the buildings at OSC and other residential buildings and streets to the east and south of the WC sites. This is condition creates a serious glare hazard to drivers, summertime vehicle damage for some residents and for others it will raise cooling costs in the summer. Example: See the damage that results from reflected heat from reflective glass on e Or it 1 r114441kj Atuitczr t 71 • t ► I • DLM Architects Design Review Memo No. 3 03/05/20 605 Thalia Point Rd., Virginia Beach, VA 23452 davidm@dlmarchs.com Page - 2 A14111 11 ( : 1 Ocean Shore Condominium (OSC) and other area property owner's concerns re: Westminster Canterbury on the Chesapeake Bay expansion. multi-story buildings as it hits roofs and wall surfaces. These buildings demonstrate what will become a problem for OSC and the other adjacent homes and condos. This wasn't addressed in the planning staff's comments. Required: reduce the glazed area to less than 30%of the exterior wall area accordance with the designs for other high-rise residential buildings such as the Hilton at 30th Street at the oceanfront (glazed area 26%)and the Westin(glazed area=24%)at the Town Center district in Virginia Beach. f. Noise Pollution: Though the presentation drawings weren't detailed enough to confirm this, when questioned, Mark said all the heating, ventilating and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment will be placed on the roof of the tower shielded from view behind a roof-top mechanical screen wall. Required: This is required to attenuate the noise generated by through-the-wall HVAC units used in a typical multi-story residential tower. This wasn't addressed in the planning staff s comments. g. Noise Pollution#2: The preliminary drawings show 2 emergency generators on the 1st floor in both the Memory Unit and the senior living tower. The emergency generators are powered by diesel engines that discharge their exhaust gases and noise into the intersection of Ocean Shore Ave. and Starfish Road. These four (4) emergency generators are run regularly (once a week) for about 15 to 30 minutes a piece to test their operating condition. Example: Westin emergency generator on Columbus St. across from Dick's Sporting Goods. Required: provide a sound attenuated enclosure around the generators, an exhaust muffler and/or an interstate type sound barrier between the common property line with Ocean Shore condominium to reduce the sound level to less than 65 dB daytime and 45 dB nighttime per generator at the southwest corner of the OSC property. This wasn't addressed in the planning staffs comments. 8. Beach Access: Required: Existing pedestrian access from Ocean Shore Ave. to the Chesapeake Bay beachfront must be preserved. 9. Solar shadow cast by the tower onto the beach and adjacent buildings will adversely impact the comfort of beach goers. Required: The tower must be relocated from the proposed eastern edge of the OSC site to the south west edge of the Casa del Playa site. 10. Parking garage screening: Regardless of the tower location, the single image presented of the east wall shows some sort of screen wall extending for (4) stories. This will be the predominate view to the west for most all OSC homeowners. Required: See Number 11. 11. Parking Garage Ventilation: The Building Code requires about 35%of the exterior garage wall area of the proposed parking garage shall be open to the outside for ventilation. It also DLM Architects Design Review Memo No. 3 03/05/20 605 Thalia Point Rd., Virginia Beach, VA 23452 davidm@dlmarchs.com Page - 3 ILclll Y. Y V CJL111111J1c1 1..a11LctUUly llll L.11CJa1Jcal\c flay Ocean Shore Condominium (OSC) and other area property owner's concerns re: Westminster Canterbury on the Chesapeake Bay expansion. requires illumination of the parking spaces and drive aisles throughout the night. In order to provide the minimum levels of illumination, a percentage of the parking garage light will spillover the exterior walls at each floor. Bathing the adjacent properties and beach with distracting light throughout the night. Required: Provide grilles or louvers at the perimeter of the parking garage to allow for ventilation and to block outward light at the exterior wall. This wasn't addressed in the planning staff's comments. 12. Stormwater run-off: There is no indication of stormwater retention on the preliminary drawings or how the stormwater requirements are to be met. Required: a net reduction in impervious surface area from the existing use(s). DLM Architects Design Review Memo No. 3 03/05/20 605 Thalia Point Rd., Virginia Beach, VA 23452 davidm@dlmarchs.com Page - 4 Item 4:Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: Jamie Forrest <jamieforrest@cox.net> Sent: Sunday, March 8, 2020 5:02 PM To: William R. Landfair Subject: Westminster Canterbury Chesapeake Bay(WCCB) Expansion Concerns CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach.Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Good afternoon. My name is Jamie W. Forrest. I am an owner at Ocean Shore Condominiums located at Ocean Shore Crescent in Virginia Beach. I am writing to you with my concerns about the impact that the proposed Westminster Canterbury Chesapeake Bay (WCCB) expansion will have on our beach front community. The Shore Drive area is already bursting at the seams and this massive undertaking by WCCB is not only going to change the face of the Bayfront, but most likely the face of every ocean/waterfront community in our area. The request of WCCB will set a precedent across the City of Virginia Beach. The building WCCB is proposing will be as tall as The Westin located in Town Center. This height variance request will open the proverbial Pandora's Box to further development of high rise hotels, retirement communities, and condominiums up and down the pristine coastline of Virginia Beach. I do have many concerns, however, I will highlight a few. I would like to have the height of the proposed building reduced from 22 stories to 14 stories. This is the same height as WCCB's other building. I would also request that the building be made of brick instead of the proposed glass. I would request a solar study if the building is going to be glass. How much heat will the building be reflecting? How will this impact the neighborhoods? Both of these improvements (reduced height and brick) will keep WCCB consistent with the rest of their complex and compatible with the existing Shore Drive communities. I would encourage WCCB to flip the buildings around. Currently, the taller building is closer to Ocean Shore Condominium's property and the shorter building is closer to WCCB's current tower. If the buildings are not flipped, this will destroy the view of 4 out of 7 buildings on Ocean Shore Condominium's property. I would like to keep the beach access where it is currently located or have the beach access meander through WCCB's property instead of putting it on the west side of Ocean Shore Condominiums. WCCB is claiming that the beach access is going to be nice and well maintained. If this is the case, it would seem to be logical that WCCB would want it in the middle of their property for their own residents as well as the general community to use and to enjoy. If the beach access is placed adjacent to the west side of Ocean Shore Condominium it will create a private beach in front of WCCB since beachgoers will not gravitate to the beach to the west because of the old Lynnhaven Fishing Pier. Ocean Shore Condominium will be the only 1 property up and down Shore Drive that will have a beach access on both sides of their property. It is unfair for one property to have the burden of the community placed on their shoulders. With public access comes trash, noise and trespassers. WCCB is a smoke free facility, however, all this does is force their employees to go out on the public sidewalks and smoke. Currently, employees of WCCB come to the beach access between LaPlaya Condos and the old Lynnhaven Fish House. If they move this beach access next to Ocean Shore Condominiums,where will their employees be smoking? The employees of WCCB that do smoke leave cigarette butts and trash all along the public sidewalks. WCCB will need to provide a smoking area for their employees. Traffic is going to be another major issue. The City of Virginia Beach needs to look at eliminating parking on Starfish and either turn it into a 4-lane road or have 2 lanes leaving the area and one lane entering the area. Many of the local Bayfront residents, especially those from Cape Story by the Sea, Lynnhaven Colony, Ships Watch and Ocean Shore Condominiums would appreciate any support you could provide with our endeavors. We know we cannot stop WCCB from building, they have a right to do so, however, we would request that WCCB conforms to build within established neighborhood and the City of Virginia Beach guidelines. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Jamie W. Forrest 2 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: TA Forrest <taforrest@cox.net> Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 12:08 PM To: City Council; branch.oliver@gmail.com; Planning Administration;William R. Landfair Subject: OPPOSITION TO WCCB CURRENT EXPANSION PLANS CAUTIUPR, This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. To: Virginia Beach City Council Virginia Beach Planning Commission Mr. William Landfair, Staff Planner I am a resident of Ocean Shore Condominiums located adjacent to the Lynnhaven Fishing Pier property. I am opposed to the Westminster Canterbury(W-C) expansion, as currently proposed to the City of Virginia Beach leadership. My reasons are not based on feelings, emotions or other psychological reasons which have no basis in fact as justification to protest change. On the contrary, I would support W-C expansion if the following are met: 1- Must meet existing city ordinances, codes, statutes or regulations including Business District Section 901 height restrictions and Shore Drive Corridor Overlay Section 1704 Density requirements. 2 - Explanation from the Staff Planner who cites in his report that he met with an organization that does not exist (i.e. the Shore Drive Coalition of Civic Leagues), and that he did not officially meet with an organization cited in his report on a specific date, November 19, 2019 (i.e. the Shore Drive Coalition of Civic Leagues.) These errors lead to question the validity of the report and the approval recommendation by Mr. Landfair. 3 - More details of who authored the Comprehensive Plan's vision for the Suburban Area's Bayfront Community, per the staff recommendation for approval, and how a 22 story glass building is consistent with the current aesthetics given that no other residential tower on the Bayfront has a significant glass exterior, including the other W-C towers. 4- More details of who authored the Shore Drive Corridor Plan, and how the W-C expansion can be in conformance with the Plan, yet not be in accordance with the Shore Drive Corridor Overlay Section 1704- Density requirements of maximum 24 units per acre. 5-A comprehensive plan from the City of Virginia Beach to improve/widen Starfish Road north of Shore Drive to accommodate the current traffic issues and projected traffic issues once any approved expansion is completed. Thank you for your consideration. Tom Forrest 1 item 4: vv estmmster t. anteroury on Lnesapeaxe nay William R. Landfair From: Planning Administration Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2020 9:04 AM To: William R. Landfair Subject: FW:Affects of the Westminster-Canterbury Expansion Bill, See email of opposition received for Westminster-Canterbury Application. Received in the Planning Admin inbox on 2/25/2020. Marchelle L. Coleman, Planner II City of Virginia Beach Planning&Community Development 2875 Sabre Street, Suite 500 Virginia Beach,VA 23452 (757) 385-8557 (Direct) (757) 385-4621 (Office) mcoleman@vbgov.com Original Message From: Celia Friedman<jaymfcpa@aol.com> Sent:Tuesday, February 25, 2020 8:46 PM To: Bob M. Dyer<BDyer@vbgov.com>;James L. Wood <JLWood@vbgov.com>;Jessica Abbott<jabbott@vbgov.com>; Michael Berlucchi <mberlucc@vbgov.com>; Barbara Henley<BHenley@vbgov.com>; Louis R.Jones<LRJones@vbgov.com>;John Moss<JDMoss@vbgov.com>;Aaron R. Rouse <ARouse@vbgov.com>; Guy K.Tower<gtower@vbgov.com>; Rosemary C.Wilson<RCWilson@vbgov.com>;Sabrina D. Wooten <swooten@vbgov.com>; galcarzbpc@icloud.com; wgrahamVBPC@icloud.com; horsley_don@yahoo.com; mainman@inmanstrickler.com; branch.oliver@gmail.com; dredmondvbpc@icloud.com;johnhcoston@gmail.com; rjrklein@gmail.com;jckwall@aol.com; dweiner@batchelder-brick.com Subject:Affects of the Westminster-Canterbury Expansion CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Virginia Beach Planning Committee Members and Virginia Beach City Council Members, > I. Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay > I am writing to you about my concerns of the expansion plans for Westminster-Canterbury on Shore Drive. Being a neighbor of this complex, I have many concerns but I will concentrate on just a few.The proposed plans for Westminster-Canterbury are encroaching upon my condo complex.There is sufficient land for Westminster-Canterbury to build this new tower closer to their existing property, but they are concerned about blocking the beautiful bay views from existing residents.They have no regard that this tower in the proposed location blocks the beautiful view for many of our condo residents.These plans to place this building directly next to ours will also create direct noise, not only from the build, but also from deliveries, waste pickup,traffic. >Starfish Road and Ocean Shore Avenue are directly affected by the Westminster-Canterbury expansion.These two roads are already difficult to maneuver (especially in the summer) but with the additional traffic and especially the need for more parking,travel (automotive and pedestrian) will be greatly affected. I realize the W-C plans include parking facilities, however I do not believe that for one unprecedented 22 story building plus an additional 7 story building,they have not designated enough for the staff, residents and visitors that they expect, especially since they will be taking away parking areas to erect these new structures. Where is this overflow of traffic supposed to go? > > Plans are also to move the pedestrian public access to the beach next to our property.This will surround our complex with public access on both sides We already have public access to the East side of our property.This has the capability of crowding our beach space while giving Westminster-Canterbury a private beach. > >There are a lot of issues that haven't been addressed concerning the size of this expansion. I am not against expansion but would hope Westminster- Canterbury will listen to their neighbors and alter their plans to be more considerate of their many neighbors.Thank you for your time to listen to my concerns, > >Celia Friedman > > > >Sent from my iPad 2 item 4: vv estminster l,anteroury on l nesapeaxe nay William R. Landfair From: P Gandy <pattigandy@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, March 8, 2020 7:47 PM To: William R. Landfair Subject: Westminister Canterbury CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. To whom it may concern, Im a property owner at Ocean Shores Condominium. Im highly concerned about the upcoming expansion of Westminister. It will of course be extremely loud and cause airborne dirt issues. Not to mention, excessive parking all up and down the near by streets.The workers will need somewhere to park. And, i really don't understand that Westminister Canterbury can make the beach right in front of the property....a private beach. Its a public beach. Many of the locals purchased property there because of the beach. Its insane to think that right could be taken away. Our beach, in front of Ocean Shore Condominiums, isnt private. I grew up enjoying that public beach for the past 52 years. There seems to be many issues surrounding the expansion of Westminister Canterbury. I hope and pray that the city officials take into consideration all of our concerns. Sincerely, Patti Gandy 2417 Ocea Shore Cres Va Beach i 11C111`*. VV CJi111111JLC1 ..,1111C1 UU1 y 011 1.11CJaf1Ca1C Day I COMMONWEALTH No04 °° LODGING March 3, 2020 Dear: VB City Council Members and VB Planning Commission Board Members, Soon,you will be considering the Westminster-Canterbury on the Chesapeake Bay expansion application. I strongly urge you to support it for several reasons. As the Managing Director of Commonwealth Lodging, I know first-hand the positive economic impacts a project of this magnitude will bring to the city given our recent first hand experiences surrounding the redevelopment and conversion of the old Virginia Beach Resort and Conference Center to the Delta Hotels by Marriott Virginia Beach Bayfront Suites. The additional apartments they are adding will mean more people visiting Shore Drive businesses-- not only by residents, but from their friends and family who visit them. As a result, we anticipate this will generate additional demand for lodging needs as well. Given the proximity of our business, we look forward to hosting the resident's families and friends of Westminster-Canterbury. This is a win-win proposal and only continues to enhance the Shore Drive corridor. Westminster-Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay has been part of our city for nearly four decades and has a good track record as a responsible and active member of the Shore Drive business community. With the expansion,Westminster-Canterbury can help meet the housing and healthcare needs of more seniors in Virginia Beach, and the Shore Drive business community benefits from the increased visitors into their establishments. I respectfully ask that you approve their expansion application. Sincere) D ne Gauthier Managing Director 208 Golden Oak Court Suite 100 Virginia Beach, VA 23452 Tel: (757)333-7176 Fax: (757)299-2976 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: Planning Administration Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 11:33 AM To: William R. Landfair Subject: FW:Westminster expansion Bill, See email received in the Planning Administration inbox on 3/7/2020. Marchelle L. Coleman, Planner II 2875 Sabre Street,Suite 500 Virginia Beach,VA 23452 (757) 385-8557 (Direct) (757) 385-4621 (Office) mcoleman@vbgov.com Original Message From: Carolyn Gavin<carolyngavin@aol.com> Sent:Saturday, March 7, 2020 2:20 PM To:dredmondvbpc@icloud.com Subject: Westminster expansion CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. The expansion building should be no taller than the current existing buildings. Carolyn Gavin 2830 Shore Drive VB 23451 And a future Westminster resident Sent from my iPhone 1 11C111`t. VV CSL111111SLC1 1..d11LC1[JUL y 011 1.11GJdpCdriC Day William R. Landfair From: diane gould <dianegould@aol.com> Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 10:32 AM To: William R. Landfair Subject: Westminster Canterbury expansion CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Mr.Landfair, Below is a letter I wrote to City council Members and Commissioners. I was not able to deliver it to: George Alcaraz - Planning Commission - qalcarazbpcicloud.com Steve Barnes - Planning Commission - No email address as their address was not correct. Would you please pass this along. Will you also make sure everyone else got my e-mail expressing my opposition to this expansion. Dear Commissioner, We are residents of Ocean Shore Condominium. It has come to our attention that Westminster Canterbury is planning a very large expansion to their property on Ocean Shore Avenue. I am at a loss as to how this can occur. How can they be allowed to build such a tall building when other buildings on the bay have been limited in size? This will have a catastrophic effect on us. Let me explain. I bought my property as insurance for my old age. The income when I need nursing home care will come from the sale of my property which I feel will be reduced in value due to a tall building next door. The sun which will be blocked will reduce my enjoyment of the pool and more dangerously the parking lot/driveway will not be available for use as snow and ice will not melt in the shade. Our street will be over used making it difficult for us to get in and out of our home. I ask you. Would you want this large building as your neighbor? Would 1 you buy a home next to a tall building? Please help us and do not let this expansion as planned go forward. Sincerely, Diane Gould Werbel Samuel Werbel 2421 Ocean Shore Crescent unit 203 Virginia Beach,VA 23451 2 item 4: Westminster Lanterbury on cnesapeaxe bay William R. Landfair From: Larry Klar <drfish13@aol.com> Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 2:00 PM To: William R. Landfair Subject: Westminster Cantibery CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Sir.As a resident of Ocean Shore Condominiums, I can't think of a worse idea than to allow the expansion of WC at the expense of nearby resident's way of life and property values decreases. Dr. Lawrence A. Klar Sent from my iPhone i 11C111`t. VV CSLIIIIIISLC1 Vd111CI VUl y 1111 V11CJdpCdriC uay William R. Landfair From: Marci Krause <mkrause008@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2020 1:05 PM To: William R. Landfair Subject: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay(WC) Expansion CAUTION This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Virginia Beach Planning Commission: I am writing this as a concerned resident of Ocean Shore Condominiums which is adjacent to WC. This extensive proposed expansion of WC appears on your agenda tomorrow and their proposed expansion as is gives me great concerns and I am very much opposed to it as is. I also know that some expansion will happen but would like to voice my concerns as follows: *I believe the height of the independent living facility of 22 stories would set a negative and irreversible precedent for all properties along Shore Drive. It would totally change the landscape of Virginia Beach along Shore Drive and forever harm our current neighborhoods. *I would favor a building of the already existing height of WC and construction of similar exterior brick instead of glass. The positioning of the building would also negatively affect the adjacent properties. The planned position of the taller building on the east side of the property is obviously done to minimize the disruption of their residents views. However, it is done at the expense of the adjacent property owners who will lose their views as well as creating a walled in effect that will negatively impact their quality of life and property values. I would strongly encourage WC to flip the proposed two buildings around to help mitigate the negative impact the adjacent property owners will experience. *The current layout of the 2 proposed buildings also shows that the majority if not all of the negative operational elements required for the buildings are directed at the surrounding communities. *By moving the public beach access further to the east, bordering the Ocean Shore Condominiums, would deny easy access by the public and put Ocean Shore Condominiums as the only property on Shore Drive that has beach access on both sides of the property.This is not fair for one property to have the burden of the community placed upon our shoulders.Their proposed relocation of the beach access further eastward also channels the beach going public away from their property and the beach area in front of WC. WC is essentially creating the perception that this part of the beach is now private and the public is not welcome. *Traffic is going to be another major issue. I would encourage the city to look at eliminating parking on Starfish and also look at elongating the left hand turn lane from Shore Drive leading into Starfish. Otherwise, the traffic on Shore Drive will back up for people waiting to enter Starfish. With the added traffic from the WC project and the large apartment complex on Great Neck Road, the traffic on Shore Drive will be up significantly. 1 *My fear is that the existing property owners will be forever losing the most wonderful attributes of our Ocean Shore community living, our peaceful environment, minimal traffic issues and our safe pedestrian/bicycle transit. I ask you as City planners that you give careful consideration of the irreversible impact of this WC project that will have on our City, residents and property owners.The applicant has the right to the highest and best use of their property but does not have the right to damage our property and home values. Very Respectfully. Marci Krause Ocean Shore Condominium Resident 2 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake hay William R. Landfair From: Amy Lauer <alplauer@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 10:19 AM To: William R. Landfair Subject: Fw: Planning Commission public hearing 3/11- Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay `r\Ll i iuN.This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Good morning Mr. Landfair, I am forwarding this email I sent last week to members of the Planning Commission, and City Council regarding concerns with the Westminster expansion project. It just came to my attention that you coordinate information for the Planning Commission, and should have been included as well. Apologies for just getting this to you today. Sincerely, Amy Lauer Forwarded Message From: Amy Lauer<alplauer@yahoo.com> To: galcarazbpc@icloud.com <galcarazbpc@icloud.com>; wgrahamVBPC@icloud.com <wgrahamvbpc@icloud.com>; horsley_don@yahoo.com <horsley_don@yahoo.com>; mainman@inmanstrickler.com <mainman@inmanstrickler.com>; branch.oliver@gmail.com <branch.oliver@gmail.com>: dredmondVBPC@icloud.com <dredmondvbpc@icloud.com>; johnhcoston@gmail.com <johnhcoston@gmail.com>; rjrklein@gmail.com <rjrklein@gmail.com>; jckwall@aol.com <jckwall@aol.com>: dweiner@batchelder-brick.com <dweiner@batchelder-brick.com> Cc: bdyer@vbgov.com <bdyer@vbgov.com>; jlwood@vbgov.com <jlwood@vbgov.com>: Jabbott@vbgov.com <jabbott@vbgov.com>: mberlucc@vbgov.com <mberlucc@vbgov.com>; bhenley@vbgov.com <bhenley@vbgov.com>; Lrjones@vbgov.com <Irjones@vbgov.com>; jdmoss@vbgov.com <jdmoss@vbgov.com>: arouse@vbgov.com <arouse@vbgov.com>; gtower@vbgov.com <gtower@vbgov.com>; rcwilson@vbgov.com <rcwilson@vbgov.com>; Swooten@vbgov.com <swooten@vbgov.com> Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2020, 09:34:43 AM EST Subject: Planning Commission public hearing 3/11-Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Re: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay [Applicant & Owner] Modification of Conditions (GPINs 1590004510, 1590100553, 1590101535, 1590102542, 1590009984, 1590009705 & 1590100956) Virginia Beach Planning Commission: 1 1LCII1't: VVCSLII11I1SLer l..aIiteruuIy oI1 l.I1CSilpeaI a nay The above referenced Westminster Canterbury expansion plan appears on the agenda for the Planning Commission public hearing on March 11, 2020. As a resident of Virginia Beach, and a property owner directly across from the proposed W-C expansion, I have concerns on the proposal as submitted. - I believe that the proposed 22-story building at Bay Front will have a significantly negative impact on the surrounding property owners, the community and the environment. The height will set an irreversible present for building along the Shore Drive Corridor, as well as overshadowing the surrounding structures. As a resolution I would recommend this building be set to a maximum of 14 stories (the current height of the W-C main building.) - In addition to the height of the building, I have concern over the use of reflective glass on the exterior. Not only does this conflict with the current aesthetics of the surrounding structures, but this building will be situated within the Atlantic Flyway for Migratory Birds potentially causing harm to migrating birds. Constructing this building with the same brick exterior as the current W-C building would be more suitable aesthetically and environmentally with surrounding area. - Street parking, particularly in the summer months, is already very limited between beach goers and parking overflow from W-C. With the addition of both the proposed independent/assisted living on the Bay front and the healthcare building between Starfish and Urchin the situation will escalate. This will only be heightened further during construction. I feel that W-C should offer a parking plan that not only accommodates both future and current residence and employees ample parking on their property, so they do not have to use up the limited street parking available. - Another concern is regarding W-C smoke-free environment. Although I am all for smoke-free, this forces employees and residence to use public area for smoking. With the move of the beach public access, as well as the addition of the healthcare facility, this will bring the smoke closer to adjacent residence properties. One resolution would be to keep the public access where it currently is located, where many come to smoke, keeping this more within the W-C boundaries. Otherwise, I would like to see a designated smoking area within their campus. The last concern that I will voice here is the increase of noise, not just during construction, but once the project is complete. With the increase in traffic, placement of delivery entrances and trash collection, and employees coming and going at different hours, what is currently a very quiet neighborhood will be no more. This is one of the main reasons I decided to purchase property and live in this area. Please give careful consideration to the irreversible impact that this project will have on the Shore Drive Corridor residents and property owners. Sincerely, Amy Lauer 2 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: LISA LEIDIG <Ileidig@verizon.net> Sent: Friday, March 6, 2020 11:54 AM To: galcarazvbpc@icloud.com; wgrahamVBPC@icloud.com; horsley_don@yahoo.com; mainman@inmanstrickler.com; branch.oliver@gmail.com; dredmondvbpc@icloud.com; rripley@ripheat.com; JRucinskiVBPC@icloud.com;jckwall@aol.com; dweiner@batchelder-brick.com; City Council; Planning Administration; William R. Landfair Subject: Westminster-Canterbury Modification proposal March 11, 2020 CAUTION This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. I am writing to you in opposition to the Westminster Canterbury (WC) modification request to be heard on March 11, 2020. I am very disappointed that the Planning Commission recommended approval of this modification and I would like this request to be denied for the following reasons: Beach access -The current beach access that ends at Starfish Road is publicly owned by the City of Virginia Beach. WC does not have the right to request to remove this public access and move it to east of their property adjacent to Ocean Shore Condos. If this access is moved, it will create a private beach for WC as there will be no public access for approximately 4/10ths of a mile (from west of Ocean Shore Condos to Kleen Street) as during periods of high tides or a steady northeast wind you can't get under the fishing pier as water is pushed up under the pier and the remaining structure that used to be the Lynnhaven Fish house. There is also precedent- North Carolina in March 2020 a judge ordered that an existing public beach access must remain public as access points at the end of state roads are legally public. I have lived on Starfish and use this access for 27 years all year long, so I am very familiar with the tidal changes on this beach. During the summer, HRT has route 35 from the oceanfront up to Pleasure House Road and this includes pickup/drop off at the bus stop in front of WC. Where are these visitors/residents going to go to access the beach? Density/Height-This modification proposal goes against both the height restrictions for senior living (City Code, Appendix A-Zoning, ARTICLE 9, Section 901, Senior Housing is limited to a height of 165 feet) and the Shore Drive Corridor Overlay District(established in 2000). If this proposal is allowed, WC would be over the maximum density by almost 300% and violate both. The height restriction is not frivolous- it was established for the safety of the residents. Are we going to put profit over the safety of our residents? EMS impact- Has a study or research been done on the possible impact of emergency services been completed? I believe that this proposal (based on my own knowledge)would negatively impact response times from the closest fire stations - Ocean Park and First Landing. Having lived on Starfish Road for so long, estimate that some EMS service visits WC at least twice a week. How do I know that? If EMS is going to WC before they turn onto Starfish, they cut their sirens off but there is no mistaking the heavy diesel engine sound as they turn and enter WC. With the additional 340 residents with 123 of these being for assisted living and memory care that will increase the demand for EMS service. I would like to see research into how many calls for service to WC were made in the past 6 months to a year and how many vehicles were dispatched. In January 2020, there was a laundry room fire at WC and there were more than 15 EMS vehicles on Starfish and Ocean Shore-they had blocked the intersection of these roads and the street was clogged with emergency vehicles. I know this is due in part to the height of the existing tower as well as the residents that live there. I do not want to have to worry if I have an emergency that I will not get a quick response because they are already dispatched to WC. 1 aax.au T. r r UJLLA y vaa `.aa�.our.una. a,uy Tower location-if any part of the modification is allowed, the high-rise tower should be relocated adjacent to the existing tower to minimize the impacts on Ocean Shore condominiums. It would also be more aesthetically pleasing to have the higher buildings grouped together and would not require the shadow/wind studies that WC was asked for. All building modifications/additions should remain within the confines of the property owned by WC without encroaching onto publicly owned property. Traffic-I am requesting that the City do a traffic study on the impact of 340 additional residents and 199 additional staff on the Shore Drive Corridor and Starfish Road. When I went to the meeting held on February 8, 2020 I was astounded to hear"and they would enter from Starfish Road, they would exit onto Starfish Road", etc. Starfish Road is a two-lane road with no dedicated right-hand turn lane onto Shore drive west from the north side. This also did not address the supporting vendor trucks, etc. that would be using Starfish. Starfish Road north of Shore Drive would need to be widened at the intersection to allow for right-hand turns, the turn lane from Shore Drive heading west would need to be extended as well to accommodate this additional traffic. Who would pay for this? A privately paid for traffic study can allow for reverse engineering -WC wanted it to show no impact on traffic and it is possible that the data collected is not accurate. It also did not appear to meet the traffic study standards set by the City of Virginia Beach. From personal experience when my father was in assisted living, my four siblings and I visited daily(not to mention grandchildren) so the traffic count for visitors is probably not accurate. Trash/parking/medical waste- I lived on Starfish Road during the past couple of construction projects and I can tell you that WC is not a good corporate neighbor. During the construction, ingress and egress to my condominium parking lot was blocked daily by WC employees and contractors. For example, there are two curb parking spots on Starfish road between Lynnshore Condominiums and Seashore Condominiums. There were often 4 cars parking there. I complained (with photos of the violation)to WC and it went ignored. I ended up having to call the local precinct and file a complaint to have stepped up parking patrols along Starfish Road. This is not something that I should have been forced to do-WC should have advised their employees and contractors to park appropriately without negatively impacting the residents in the area. During this time, I collected daily medical waste (masks, hair nets, latex gloves) and fast food trash to the point I carried a grocery bag with me when I would get my mail. Complaints to WC (with photos)were again ignored. Construction-With this proposed construction so close to the Chesapeake Bay, how is possible toxic debris going to be prevented from getting into the water or on the beach?Great strides have been made on the health of the Bay and I would hate this to be for nothing for the possible 5 years of pollution entering the Bay due to this development. During WC last expansion, the constant high levels of noise affected my quality of life as windows could not be left open, if I worked an alternate shift and was sleeping during the day it made it impossible. The pounding and pile driving I believe damaged the foundations on the four buildings that make up Lynnshore Condominiums. We had previous foundation work performed in 2012 but had to do again in 2019 and 2020 as the foundations shifted significantly and had to do immediate remediation to prevent further damage. I do not think it is a coincidence that the buildings that had the most damage were closest to Starfish Road and WC. 2314 was the worst, then 2312, then 2310 and 2308. We are a small community and cannot continue to afford to do$100,000 foundation repairs every 7-10 years due to construction affecting the buildings. This modification needs to be denied, period. It is bad for the existing community and violates city code and the design for the Shore Drive Corridor established by the City. Lisa Leidig 2312 Starfish Road 2 ltt.111 Z. V V t.J Jtt.l uCtlltt.l ll Ul 7 Vll u11t.JC4Ft.C11\t. Lay William R. Landfair From: Frederic Levitin <doconrudee@cox.net> Sent: Sunday, March 8, 2020 7:18 PM To: William R. Landfair Subject: Fwd:Westminster Canterbury Expansion CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Please foward to Planning Commissioners and City Council Members, Thank you. I am writing this in opposition to the proposed future development of Westminster Canterbury.There are any number of concerns this project will have in regard to our own retirement living: a)What effect will hammering pilings for a twenty-two story building have on our buildings which are adjacent to Westminster Canterbury, to say nothing of the noise we will have to endure for the next twenty-four to forty-eight months during construction.Access to Starfish and the west part of Ocean Shore will be hard to travel during this time. b)Getting onto Shore Drive from Starfish is difficult now.Adding 217 residences plus new employees and deliveries will make it near impossible. I counted over 159 cars parked in the lots they now temporarily using for employees. I do not see enough parking in their plans to handle new owners and employees. c) It is unfair for our condo to have public access to the beach on either side of our property. No other condo or residence has this situation. In essence,this will grant Westminster Canterbury no public access to their beach. Public access has been established. How is it possible to have it so easily moved? d)The height of the building is way out of proportion to any other project on Shore Drive. I feel this would be an eye sore.The other buildings in Westminster 1 Ill-111 T. rr\.J Jl\.1 uQllll.l 1.11.117 Vll V11\.JG1r1\.Cli.1. Lay Canterbury are brick and so should this building in order to blend in with surrounding residences. e)There is no report on what wind effect will have on our condo as well as the heat effect if this is allowed to be a glass exterior building. Northeast and Northwest winds are prevalent throughout the year so attention to flying debris should be addressed,especially during construction. f)There is also the concern of what affect this will have on the value of our property. It is our hope that you will scale down this project to conform with this comfortable area, Very truly yours, Dr. and Mrs. Frederic R. Levitin 2424 Ocean Shore Crescent#401 Virginia Beach,VA 23451 2 11G111'Y. VY GJL111111J LGl l.iall LCl VUl y till V11CJatical\ "Jar March 4,2020 Dear Sirs and Madams: I am writing to express my opposition to the expansion proposed by Westminster Canterbury on the Chesapeake Bay at 3100 Ocean Shore Drive. Planning documents published by the City of Virginia Beach such as the Comprehensive Plan,the Shore Drive Corridor Overlay District in the City Code,and the Design Guidelines developed by the City to implement the Shore Drive Overlay District Code sections all commit to maintaining the character,economic value and aesthetic quality of the Shore Drive community and the gateway to the ocean for visitors to Virginia Beach.The proposed expansion conflicts greatly with that commitment. Please consider these comments as you review Westminster Canterbury's application for approval. Approval of this expansion as currently designed would set a precedent for the construction of high-rise towers that would totally change the neighborhood,contrary to the planning documents cited above. Ocean Shore Drive should not become a canyon of high-rises as is found on Page Avenue to the west of Westminster Canterbury. The height of the building should be reduced from 22 stories to 14 stories.This is the same height as their existing buildings and is in compliance with the VB City Code Section 901 height limit of 165' for senior housing buildings. Approval of a variance to this requirement would set a negative precedent for future development of this quiet neighborhood.Increased shading of the sand that this tower will cause is not in the best interests of a beach-focused city. Shading would be reduced if the layout of the buildings is reversed such that the taller building is closer to the current tower and the shorter building is closer to the beach.A shorter building and building relocation will decrease the impact on adjacent buildings and reduce shading on the beach_The placement of this tower in the path of the Atlantic Flyway for Migratory Birds is not environmentally sound,nor is it consistent with concern for the birds demonstrated by the contractors expanding the Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel. The City of Virginia Beach has committed to a major program to address the impact of sea level rise and recurrent flooding. This expansion project does not appear consistent with that commitment.How will this construction reduce coastal flooding?Does it make sense to locate senior housing in an area that has some of the greatest potential in the City to be impacted by coastal flooding? The application for modification of the conditional use permit indicates that impervious surface on the property will increase. There is evidence that the existing Westminster Canterbury buildings have diminished the accumulation of sand on the beach. Will the new building exacerbate this problem?Landscaping and storm water quantity and quality management activities have not been well described in site plans to date. Compliance with the City's landscaping and storm water management requirements are important to a community that is already prone to flooding,as recognized by the funding that the City has directed toward drainage improvements along Shore Drive. Prior to approving this application,you should require that Westminster Canterbury is in complete compliance with state and local storm water requirements and has addressed all concerns identified in the City's Sea-Level Rise and Recurrent Flooding plans and investigations.Westminster Canterbury must be required to build responsibly. Traffic is going to be a major issue both in the number of employee and residents' vehicles and in the increased volume of large delivery trucks accessing very narrow streets. Article 2.A of the VB City Code should be applied carefully to address these concerns. Suggestions include eliminating parking on Starfish and either turn it into a 4-lane road or have two lanes leaving the area and one entering the area. This will allow people to make a right on red exiting the area.In Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay addition,the city will need to elongate the left turn lane from Shore Drive leading into Starfish. Otherwise,the traffic will back up on Shore Drive waiting for people to enter Starfish. Finally, the City needs to look at the timing of the lights at Star Fish and Shore Drive. With the added traffic from the Westminster Canterbury project and the huge apartment project on Great Neck Road the traffic on Shore Drive will have significantly more traffic. Consideration should also be given to the tractor trailers delivering goods to the expanded complex. They will find it challenging to navigate the turns on the narrow seashore roads. Westminster Canterbury's plans include the placement of private structures in public space. Westminster Canterbury proposes to convert the former Lynnhaven Fish House that extends over the sea wall to a private pavilion open only to Westminster Canterbury residents. How can it limit use of our public beach? Do you want to set the precedent of allowing private structures over the seawall? The former restaurant and pier were open to the public. Documents in the Planning Department's files indicate that a permit from the Wetlands Board is required for the redevelopment of the restaurant into a private pavilion. When is that permit going to be evaluated?There should be opportunity for community involvement.The expansion should not be approved until this issue is evaluated. The two walkways over Starfish Road and Ocean Shore Drive will also be constructed solely for the use of Westminster Canterbury residents. It appears that the City has already agreed upon an encroachment agreement to allow the walkways to be built. However,the City Attorney has required that the walkways eventually be memorialized in a Lease of Airspace at some future date. The community had no input in these negotiations but will be impacted by the walkways crossing our local streets. This appears to be another example of the lack of consideration of the character of the community in review of the proposed expansion. We are not Town Center. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Your decision will impact our community and represents the level of your commitment to all of Virginia Beach in years to come. Very truly yours, Marina J. Liacouras 2540 Ships Watch Court Virginia Beach, VA 23451 Item 4:Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: Teresa Link <teresa.link@icloud.com> Sent: Sunday, March 8, 2020 10:05 PM To: William R. Landfair Subject: Westminister Cantebury Expansion Concerns. CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear. Mr. Landfair, I am Teresa Link and I am writing you with concern about the impact that the proposed Westminster Canterbury Chesapeake Bay (WCCB)expansion will have on our quiet beach front community. The Shore Drive area is bursting at the seams and this massive undertaking by Westminster is not only going to change the Bayfront face, but most likely the face of every ocean/waterfront community in our area. The request of Westminster Canterbury will set a precedence across the city.The building they are recommending will be as tall as The Westin @ Town Center.This height variance request will open the proverbial pandoras box to further development of high rise hotels/retirement communities/and even condominiums up and down the pristine coastline of Virginia Beach. (This letter was sent to all city council members as well as all planning commission members) These are my concerns- (There are many more- however I am trying to highlight the most important) • According to The Shore Drive Overlay district-This code deals with density and business restrictions. It has been mandated that buildings should be built according to size and scale requirements- normally 2-4 stories high with retail on bottom.This is totally opposite of the proposed 22 story building. This 22 story building will also have a 5 story villa type building for independent living. As well as the 7 story memory care unit across the street from the proposed 22 story building. o Solution - reconsider the buildout to be smaller villa type buildings- keeping within the other condominiums in the area.These condominiums are 4 stories high. • According to the City of Virginia Beach code 901 -Senior housing(which Westminster is part of) is limited to 165 feet tall - not the proposed 225 feet tall. o Solution- reconsider the buildout to be MAXIMUM of 14 stories(similar to BOTH of the existing Westminster buildings) to include their onsite parking. • Stormwater issue. Our area has been prone to flooding- in fact where I live off of Seashell Road, anytime it rains, our streets and neighboring parking lots flood and flood waters stay for days. We have no definitive information from WCCB on what their building(s) will have on the stormwater issues. • Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake liay • Movement of the public walkway 60 feet east towards the Ocean Shore Condominium complex therefore creating a private beach access only by the residents of WCCB.The only public beach access available to all of our Virginia Beach residents will either be at Kleen Street to our west or Seashell to our east. o Solution -do not move the public walkway. Many of the local Bayfront residents-especially those of us from Cape Story by the Sea, Lynnhaven Colony and the Ocean Shore Avenue residents would appreciate any support you may give us with our endeavors. We know we cannot stop the fact that WCCB wants to build and they are in all rights to do so, we just want them to build with the neighborhoods and the city guidelines. We would love to see you at one of our many neighborhood meetings regarding this. We have invited many of our city council members to our meetings, but not one has shown up. Thank you for your time and considerations. Teresa A. Link 757-6 i 5-6595 2 1LC111"I. VV CJL111111J1C1 L.[1.11LC1 UUl y llll \llCJdpCdtC Udy William R. Landfair From: ricklittle@cox.net Sent: Sunday, March 8, 2020 11:53 PM To: William R. Landfair Subject: Westminster Canterbury Expansion Project CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Mr. Landfair, I am sending this email letter to oppose the Westminster Canterbury Expansion Project in its original form. The new buildings scheduled to be 22 stories tall and the existing laws/rules are to only allow 14 stories like their current building structure. Our legal council will provide more information on this. At the meeting held at the Westminster Canterbury compound that I attended, I asked several times is there was a structural,financial increase, or engineering reason that the entire new expansion could not be flip flopped so that the 22 story structure would not be up against our Ocean Shore Crescent Condominium side.The answer was that there was no reason it could not be flip flopped and the 22 story, or whatever is decided by the Planning Commission and City Council, portion be placed in the middle of the property. I am very concerned about the property value of our condominiums decreasing with this structure blocking a major portion of the ocean view for four of out buildings.This will decrease our property values tens of thousands of dollars per building. A formal real estate assessment/appraisal will be presented to your Planning Commission on 11 MARCH. The current public beach access should remain in the same location as it has been for decades. I request that we follow the same rules put in place by our previous city leaders, lawmakers and government legislators and keep the building height restrictions at 14 stories. There is also a maximum number of units per acre that is being surpassed threefold or more with the 22 story structure. Please follow the rules and regulations that are already in place when you consider our concerns. The wind study and the parking study are a real concern as well. They will be presented to the Planning Commission on 11 March as well.There are no parking spaces along Stargate and Ocean Shore Crescent in the Spring and Summer now. Where will hundreds of workers from the new staff, contractors, vendors, etc., park? I love living in the Shore Drive Corridor and want to keep this area as community friendly as possible. Please follow the rules and regulations that are in place already when you consider the Westminster Canterbury Expansion Project as it currently proposed. It is not in compliance with several of them. 1 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay V/R Rick Little (ricklittle@cox.net) (757) 635-7755 Vice President Ocean Shore Condominium Association 2417 Ocean Shore Crescent unit#303 Virginia Beach,VA 23451 2 William R. Landfair From: RJ McGinnis <rjmcginnis@aol.com> Sent: Thursday, February 6, 2020 8:17 PM To: William R. Landfair Subject: Fwd: Westminster Canterbury Expansion Plans CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. FYI Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: RJ McGinnis<rjmcginnis@aol.com> Date: February 6, 2020 at 3:34:46 PM EST To: City VB Council Jim Wood <jlwood@vbgov.com> Cc:City VB Council Mayor Bob Dyer<bdyer@VBgov.com> Subject:Westminster Canterbury Expansion Plans I am against the development plan for the proposed expansion of Westminster Canterbury in Lynnhaven Beach at Starfish Road and Ocean Shore Avenue. In particular,the addition of a 22-story tower on the former Lynnhaven Fishing Pier Property between Ocean Shore Avenue and the Bayfront which is not compatible with other residential development along Ocean Shore Avenue, including the adjacent 4-story Ocean Shore Condominium which I was involved in the development in the early 2000's with Nick and Walter Wright after we developed the adjacent 2-3 story Ships Watch Condominium on Ocean Shore Avenue in the mid-late 1990's. I have lived just down Ocean Shore Ave from Westminster Canterbury on Ships Watch Court since 1996, but before then in 1977, as a real estate agent I sold the YWCA camp property that became the location of the original Westminster Canterbury building. The sale required approval from City Council to construct a building approximately 150 feet high since the maximum allowed height was only 75 feet in the newly established resort area zoning for the Bayfront/Shore Dr Area (Lynnhaven Beach area between Shore Dr and Bayfront from the YWCA property on the west and W Great Neck Road on the east).The 150 feet height was granted by City Council with the requirement that if the building was over 75 feet high that there be a 2 foot increase in setback from the property lines for each 1 foot increase in building height and is the reason for the design and location of the original tower building completed around 1982. However, sometime later, assume about 20 years, Westminster Canterbury received City approval to build a new large building over 75' high on the western part of the property with condominium style residences over a parking garage that was located in part of the original 2 for 1 setback area adjacent to the 3-story Lynnhaven Beach Condominium that was constructed around 1992, which now only has a small setback area from Westminster Canterbury. Additionally, I was involved in the development of the adjacent 3-story Casa Del Playa Condominium on the Bayfront at the end of Starfish Road in the early 1980's. In the 2000's Westminster Canterbury started buying the 30 1 l0.\.111 1. V 1\.J 0LV.1 Vtllll\.1 V as 1 Vll 114L j condominium units, including one from me, in order to gain control and dissolve the condominium which essentially had become an unwanted part of Westminster Canterbury, even though there was never City approval as housing for the elderly. Westminster Canterbury has been both an advantage and disadvantage for the Lynnhaven Beach area but if the proposed expansion is approved with the new 22-story tower it will be a total disadvantage that will greatly impact the adjacent and nearby residential developments due to the massive size of the retirement and medical facility with excessive building size and height that now will be on both sides of Starfish Road, which had been the previous boundary for Westminster Canterbury even after several expansions.Westminster Canterbury will become an even bigger giant along Ocean Shore Avenue and Starfish Road that will create long and imposing shadows over the neighborhood.The expansion plans need to be scaled way back to be compatible. RJ (Rip) McGinnis 2480 Ships Watch Ct Virginia Beach,VA 23451 Sent from my iPad 2 1LC111 Lt. VV CS1111111JLC1 '. d111C1 UU1 y Oil 1..11CJdpCdl\C 17dy William R. Landfair From: Doug McNeil <oscabod_doug@cox.net> Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2020 4:07 PM To: galcarazbpc@icloud.com;wgrahamnVBPC@icloud.com; horsley_don@yahoo.com; mainman@inmanstrickler.com; branch.oliver@gmail.com; dredmondvbpc@icloud.com;johnhcoston@gmail.com; rjrklein@gmail.com;jckwall@aol.com; William R. Landfair Subject: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Expansion CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Commissioners I am writing today to express my intense opposition to the design of Westminster Canterbury's planned expansion. While there are a whole host of reasons this should not go forward as planned, I will focus on three: -Developing a community instead of apartments -Wind field impact -Beauty versus a beast First, the assumption that a high rise is the only way to provide housing for seniors is false. When my parents moved from Connecticut to Virginia Beach, they looked at Westminster Canterbury but could not fathom moving from a house to an apartment and ended up buying a duplex in Atlantic Shores. This decision is becoming much more common as evidenced by the expanded "Live at Home" health care solutions being advertised in Hampton Roads, the demographics on Shore Drive and the vacancies at Overture. The Planning Commission should be encouraging Westminster Canterbury to diversify their offering like Atlantic Shores instead of copying the City of Norfolk developments. Second,the wind field impact on the surrounding homes will be significant. Ocean Shore Condominiums recently had to replace all their roofs which had been damaged by high wind events over the last several years. What became apparent is the most significant damage was to the roofs facing the space between buildings due to the concentration of the airflow. Constructing a high-rise as close to the Ocean Shore property line as proposed will certainly have an even more severe effect on the adjacent Building 2428. This may void the warranty on the roof work. Who will pay for the repairs for the next 40 years? The Planning Commission should mandate an independent study of the wind field impact on the adjacent properties and also beach erosion. 1 item'*: vv estminster uanteroury on ,nesapeaxe nay Third,the asymmetry of a twenty-two story glass building compared to the surrounding community(including their own buildings) is unacceptable. This "office building" belongs in Town Center or downtown Norfolk, not at the beachfront. Not even the Oceanfront hotels have buildings directly up against the beach. The hotels have a public boardwalk and patio restaurants that provide an esthetic transition from the beach. Westminster Canterbury's plan seems designed to fit as many bedrooms into as little land as possible. This doesn't seem like a faith-based non-profit corporation. In summary, Westminster Canterbury's whole plan is so bad it should be summarily rejected not amended and tweaked. They need to develop an expansion that fits the community not force the community to adjust to fit their plan even if it requires buying more property. In contrast the residences around the Cavalier Hotel are a shining example of how new construction can not just fit but enhance a neighborhood. That is what Virginia Beach is about. Sincerely, Doug McNeil President Ocean Shore Condominium Assoc. 2421 Ocean Shore Crescent Apt 301 Virginia Beach,VA 23451 2 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: raymond mechling <raymondmechling@hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2020 12:45 PM To: City Council; branch.oliver@gmail.com; Planning Administration; William R. Landfair; paulterkeltaub@me.com Subject: OPPOSITION TO WCCB CURRENT EXPANSION PLANS CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Fellow Citizens, I live on Shore Drive, less than a mile from WCCB. Their expansion plans are going to be a complete detriment to the Shore Drive corridor. Currently every flat spot along this corridor is being built on. This project is a huge expansion with many negative impacts on the community. To add 300 more residents in a high rise creates more demands on the infra structure of the surrounding area. I certainly hope that variances will not be granted for this project as there is no positive impact for this expansion. Sincerely, Ray and Louise Mechling 2316 Mariners Mark Way#401 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: Susan Tapper <susanit12003@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 9:52 AM To: William R. Landfair Subject: Westminster Canterbury Expansion CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. I am an owner at Ocean Shore Condominium and am writing to tell you of my discontent with the expansion plans for Westminster Canterbury. There are so many disagreeable ideas, but I will just tell you a few that worry me. First, there is the height of the planned building from their already 14 story building to a 22 story building. This is not compatible with the entire bay front area. It will not enhance our area, but be an eyesore. It also makes no sense for it to be made of glass and not brick like the current campus. The glare and wind problems with a building of that height and material will affect the entire beach community. Their plan to put the taller building closer to Ocean Shore Condominiums serves their vision for the benefit of their people, but directly affects the people living in Ocean Shore and obstructing our view. It is most upsetting that it took so long for this information to be distributed to us and clearly they assumed it was a done deal. I hope that the planning commission and council members will act responsibly and take our concerns under advisement. Thank you. Sincerely, Susan Tapper Item 4:Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: Planning Administration Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 11:12 AM To: William R. Landfair Subject: FW:Westminster Canterbury Project Bill, Here is an email of opposition for Westminster Canterbury. Sent in the Planning Admin inbox on 3/4/2020. ql\B Marchelle L. Coleman, City Planner II City of Virginia Beach Virginia Beach Planning & Community Development 2875 Sabre Street, Suite 500 Virginia Beach, VA 23452 (757) 385-8557 (Direct) (757) 385-4621 (Office) mcoleman@vbgov.com From:Cookie Miles<cookiemilesl0@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, March 4,2020 12:39 PM To:dredmondvbpc@icloud.com Subject:Westminster Canterbury Project CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach.Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. The four hundred million dollar project that is on your agenda for 3/11/20 is "The largest private capital investment in the City's history." 1 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake hay The present plan looks great if it were on an island, BUT as it stands now, it is right in our face! I have lived in Ocean Shore Condos since December, 1999 and have suffered under previous Westminster-Canterbury construction projects. This proposed project would dwarf all previous projects. It is projected to take years to complete the construction process. Imagine if Godzilla were to come here from Japan and begin stomping and raging six/seven days a week for 8-10 hours a day for years while being in YOUR backyard. Then at the end of his rampage, he decides to stay in the form of a massive statue with its backside facing YOUR home! I am not talking about shutting down this project. I am pleading with Westminster to adjust it to lessen the footprint and impact on the neighborhood. My neighbors will be contacting you about their concerns. I personally would like to concentrate on the positioning of the tower and garage. Please take the time to obtain the colorful, beautiful rendition of the proposed 22 story tower with attached garage titled THE DESIGN. In addition, please obtain the conceptual master plan for Westminster Canterbury while noticing the faint images of Ocean Shore Condos and their proximity to the tower. While you are taking all of this in, please visualize if the tower and garage were flip flopped. The first thing that should occur to you is now the tower (Godzilla) is more centered on the Westminster property and further away from Ocean Shore Condos. If Westminster would make this somewhat major concession to flip flop the tower and garage, it would go a long way to truly prove their intention to be a good neighbor. This project is going to be here for generations and what is done now will be a reflection on Westminster Canterbury, The Planning Commission, and most of all the current members of the City Council. Respectfully, Richard Miles 2 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Iiay William R. Landfair From: jo.moorefield@gmail.com Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2020 2:28 PM To: City Council; branch.oliver@gmail.com; Planning Administration;William R. Landfair; paulterkeltaub@me.com Subject: OPPOSITION TO WCCB CURRENT EXPANSION PLANS CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear city officials, Please thoughtfully consider the concerns of the surrounding the community before allowing a high rise to be constructed on Shore Drive. I'm not opposed to Westminster Canterbury expanding, but believe the plans should just be confined by the current codes and guidelines for height and density.The city codes are there for a reason and we all have to comply. Thank you, JoAnne Moorefield Neighbor and Realtor Sent from Mail for Windows 10 1 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: Planning Administration Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 11:18 AM To: William R. Landfair Subject: FW: [New post] SDCC Requests Planning Commission to DENY proposed development by Westminster Canterbury Bill, Here is an email of opposition for Westminster Canterbury. Sent in the Planning Admin inbox on 3/5/2020. VBMarchelle L. Coleman, City Planner II City of Virginia Beach Virginia Beach Planning & Community Development 2875 Sabre Street, Suite 500 Virginia Beach, VA 23452 (757) 385-8557 (Direct) (757) 385-4621 (Office) mcoleman@vbclov.com From: emunden@aol.com <emunden@aol.com> Sent:Thursday, March 5, 2020 11:40 AM To: brancholiver@gmail.com; dredmondvbpc@icloud.com; dweiner@batchelder-brick.com; galcarazvbpc@icloud.com; horsley_don@yahoo.com; jckwall@aol.com; JRucinskiVBPC@icloud.com; mainman@inmanstrickler.com; rripley@ripheat.com; wgrahamVBPC@icloud.com Subject: Fwd: [New post] SDCC Requests Planning Commission to DENY proposed development by Westminster Canterbury CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach.Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. I support this letter to the Planning Commission from SDCC Empsy Munden --- Cape Story by the Sea 1 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Original Message From: #WeLoveShoreDrive <comment-reply@wordpress.com> To: emunden <emunden@aol.com> Sent: Thu, Mar 5, 2020 10:54 am Subject: [New post] SDCC Requests Planning Commission to DENY proposed development by Westminster Canterbury toddsolomon posted: "The following request has been sent to the Planning Commission requesting they DENY the current proposed expansion of Westminster Canterbury. Dear Ms. Oliver and Planning Commission Members, On behalf of the Shore Drive Community Coalition" Respond to this post by replying above this line New post on #WeLoveShoreDrive SDCC Requests Planning Commission to DENY proposed development by Westminster Canterbury toddsolomon The following request has been sent to the Planning Commission requesting they DENY the current proposed expansion of Westminster Canterbury. Dear Ms. Oliver and Planning Commission Members, On behalf of the Shore Drive Community Coalition (SDCC), we formally request that the Planning Commission "DENY" the subject request from Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay (WCCB) for a modification of conditions to build a 4 story parking garage with 22 story tower senior living facility and a 7 story memory unit facility connected by enclosed elevated pedestrian bridges over public roadways. The SDCC is a 20 year old umbrella civic organization representing many neighborhood civic leagues, condo and homeowner associations along the Shore Drive corridor. At our February general meeting, we unanimously voted on the following motion regarding the current proposed WCCB development. 2 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay "The Shore Drive Community Coalition opposes the Westminster Canterbury expansion proposal as it is in violation of the Shore Drive Overlay density restrictions and the Business 901 height restrictions" We understand that it's the Planning Commission responsibility to review projects and determine if they are in accordance with existing City codes and to allow variances based on hardships. As our motion states, the proposed project is considered multi-family senior living housing that violates the following City codes and has no hardships. • Shore Drive Corridor Overlay Section 1704- Density requirements of maximum 24 units per acre. • Business District Section 901 —Senior housing building height restriction of 165 feet. The SDCC feels that this project would also set a harmful precedent for future development requests of high density tower structures in Business B2 and B4 zoning that would be incompatible with the surrounding residential and lower density multi-family dwellings that make the Shore Drive Corridor unique. Thank you for your consideration in denying the subject application, Todd Solomon —SDCC President toddsolomon I March 5,2020 at 10:54 am I Categories:Communications, Current Concerns, ENGAGE, News,Quality of Life,WCCB I URL:https://wp.me/plhrol-2U9 Comment See all comments Unsubscribe to no longer receive posts from#WeLoveShoreDrive. Change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions. Trouble clicking?Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://weloveshoredrive.com/2020/03/05/sdcc-requests-plan ni nq-commission-to-de ny-proposed-development-by-westmi n ster-canterbu rv/ Thanks for flying with lNordPress.com 3 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: Planning Administration Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 11:11 AM To: William R. Landfair Subject: FW:Willis Wayside Rezoning Bill, Here is an email of opposition for Willis Wayside. Sent in the Planning Admin inbox on 3/3/2020. Vjrk3 Marchelle L. Coleman, City Planner II City of Virginia Beach Virginia Beach Planning & Community Development 2875 Sabre Street, Suite 500 Virginia Beach, VA 23452 (757) 385-8557 (Direct) (757) 385-4621 (Office) mcoleman@vbgov.com From:Sharon Pollard <nanasharon41@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, March 3, 2020 8:34 PM To: dredmondvbpc@icloud.com Subject: Willis Wayside Rezoning I CAU!ION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Mr. Redmon: My husband and I are deeply concerned regarding the proposed apartment/business complex on the Willis Furniture property that will require a change of the zoning in that area from B2 to B4. A few of our concerns are listed below: 1. Parking-The fact that the number of parking spaces is not up to code will cause people to park on neighboring streets and that doesn't even include friends and family members who will be visiting those apartments. 1 item 4: w estmtnster Canterbury on cnesapeaxe tray 2.Traffic-Traffic issues will definitely be heightened. Even now anyone turning onto Thalia Road from the west can be left out in the middle of Virginia Beach Blvd. when someone in front of them slowly turns into the Aldi parking lot. We can only imagine how much the traffic in this area will increase with over 600 people living in those apartments. 3. Fire and EMS- It is our understanding that there is not enough adequate space for emergency vehicles to respond to a five-story building fire and this fact cannot be acceptable because lives could be lost. There are several more issues that concern us but I won't list those in this email because it would be too lengthy. My husband and I would like to go on record as being totally against this project and the B4 zoning change for this area. Thank you for this opportunity to express some of our thoughts. Sincerely, John and Sharon Pollard Thalia Acres 4313 Lynnville Crescent Virginia Beach,VA 23452 NanaSharon41@gmail.com 2 Item 4:Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: Lynda Rhiel <Irhiel@verizon.net> Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 3:42 PM To: William R. Landfair Subject: Fwd: Westminster Canterbury Expansion CAUTION This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. William Landfair Dear Sir, On March 11, 2020 the Virginia Beach Planning Commission will address the expansion plans for Westminster Canterbury. As a longtime resident of Virginia Beach, and homeowner in the neighborhood, I have major concerns regarding the extensive, expansion project of Westminster Canterbury, and the effect it will have on the community. The proposed 22 story building is 8 stories higher than the tallest existing Westminster Canterbury building, and approximately 18 stories higher than the condos, townhomes and residences along Ocean Shore Dr. The plans are for it to have walls made of glass. This 22 story building is planned to be built on the property of the previous Lynnhaven Fish House and parking lot. This is up against the Ocean Shore Condo community and specifically buildings 2428 and 2425. A 5-7 story building will be on the other side where the Casa del Playa condos are. This raises issues of beach shading, blockage of bay and 1 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay coastline views, solar/heat damage due to the glass wall facing west, and wind tunnel effects. CAN THESE 2 BUILDINGS BE FLIPPED, MAKING THE SHORT BUILDING THE ONE CLOSE TO OCEAN SHORE CONDOS AND THE TALL BUILDING CLOSER TO WESTMINSTER CANTERBURY? Westminster Canterbury is requesting to move the PUBLIC BEACH ACCESS from its current spot to directly alongside Ocean Shore Condo Building 2428. When the public uses this access, it will walk onto the sand seeing the pier, the old pier structure and the new 22 story buildingg to the left, giving the illusion that the beach in front of the Westminster Canterbury property is a private beach. They will therefore turn right, using the beach in front of the Ocean Shore Condominium development. The Ocean Shore Condo development also has a public access along its east border, which will make it the only development having public beach access on both sides of its property. Increase in TRAFFIC due to more residents, staff, visitors, delivery trucks, trash/recycle trucks, etc. is a major issue for the city to review. The traffic along Shore Dr. is already dealing with the apartments and condos still being built at the foot of the Lesner Bridge, and the huge apartment complex going up on Great Neck Road. Major road, traffic light, sidewalk and on street parking must be studied. An assisted living/memory care residential building is to be built across Ocean Shore Drive in the two existing parking lots.This building will totally box in the communities adjacent and to the south of this building. 2 We have all moved to the Shore Drive corridor to enjoy the bay way of life; cozy, coastal and welcoming, with proximity to, and views of, the beach. I implore Westminster Canterbury to revise their plans to help preserve this wonderful way of living. Respectfully, Lynda Rhiel 3 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: G Steven Rhiel <grhiell @verizon.net> Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 7:49 PM To: William R. Landfair Subject: Fwd:Westminister Canterbury Expansion CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Mr. Landfair My name is George Rhiel and I am a resident in a condo located at 2428 Ocean Shore Crescent. This condo building is located adjacent to what was the Lynnhaven Fish House which is now owned by Westminster Canterbury. I am writing this to respond to your request for feedback concerning the Westminster expansion project and its effect not only on 2428 Ocean Shore Crescent but also the Shore Drive community. I was invited to attend a meeting by Westminster Canterbury to see a presentation of the plans for the expansion. These types of long- term care facilities are of great value to the community and will provide additional tax revenue to Virginia Beach. However, the plan as it is now, is problematic to the residents of the area immediately next to Westminster and to residents at greater distances. My main issues are with the height and placement of the 22-story residence building that is to be constructed next to the condo building where I live and with the relocation of the public beach access to the same location. During a meeting with Westminster Canterbury, we suggested that the 22-story structure could be placed away from Ocean Shore Condos, closer to Westminster buildings by flipping the footprint provided by their architect. The presenter of the Westminster project responded with several reasons why they would not do this. It seems that the main reason is that it would block some of the Westminster residents from a bay view. The implication, then, is that Westminster is placing the sky scrapper in a position of blocking the only bay view of residents in several of the Ocean Shore Condo buildings as well as residents along Starfish Road, so that a few of their residents would have an open view of the bay. The second issue I have is with the move of the the public beach access from the end of Starfish Road to a partial of land that is adjacent to our condo building. This would create a shift of beach goers to beaches in front of Ocean Shore Condos and away from the beaches in front of Westminster. The result is that it creates a nearly private beach for the residents of Westminster. There are several other issues with the skyscraper which will affect all the residents of Ocean Shore Condos, Starfish Road and the Shore Drive corridor. These include long reaching shadows on our beaches and condo buildings, wind tunnels that would be created, i Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay the effect of the sun hitting the glass exterior of the skyscraper creating a heating effect on the adjoining Ocean Shore Crescent building, increased noise from the heating and cooling the units in such a large structure, and a substantial increase in traffic on Ocean Shore Crescent, Starfish Road, and Shore Drive. A possible solution to the main issue is to relocate the 22-story building and the beach access path to the Westminster side of the new development. This would not only help to solve the main problems I have outlined above, but, in my opinion, would create a more aesthetically appealing look as the skyscraper fits well with the existing Westminster buildings. Another, better, solution would be to move the skyscraper to the lot Westminster owns across Ocean Shore Crescent from the beach. This would place the skyscraper away from the beach front. Do we really want to set a president of building skyscrapers of this height right on the bay beach front? Please consider my comments seriously in order to maintain the integrity of our bay front. Sincerely, G. Steven Rhiel 2428 Ocean Shore Crescent, Unit 303 2 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: Pete Salant <petesalant@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 11:43 PM To: City Council; branch.oliver@gmail.com; Planning Administration;William R. Landfair; paulterkeltaub@me.com; Aaron R. Rouse; City Council; branch.oliver@gmail.com; Planning Administration; William R. Landfair; paulterkeltaub@me.com; msykes1@cox.net; sykes559@gmail.com Cc: Stacey Salant; Caroline Salant Subject: Westminster Canterbury Proposed Expansion Attachments: cidf_k7732n1x0.pdf CAUTION.This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Letter to City Council, Planning Commission, and Mayoral Candidate re: Proposed Westminster Canterbury expansion. We plan to speak at today's meeting to ask that WC move the new proposed tower adjacent and contiguous to the existing towers, to reduce the height of the proposed new tower to that of the other two on aesthetic grounds, and to contain noise levels within the grounds of WC rather than allow generator and other man-made noise to spill over to the community. My daughter, Caroline Salant, wishes to speak in place of my wife (her mother), Dr.Stacey Salant, Ph.D., who must work and cannot attend, about the warming and climate change effects of the proposed glass building. We will arrive as close to 11 as possible to sign in and provide our intention to speak. We think it is an abomination that this meeting is being held in the middle of the work day, rather than in the evening when working people can attend. This is clearly a politicized effort to limit community attendance, which is unacceptable. We are concerned that the resale value of our newly purchased condo unit, located next door to the new WC construction,will drop like a rock, contrary to the blatant lies told by WC's attorney and rep. WC has grossly exaggerated the number of their residents who are in favor of expansion. We will stop at absolutely nothing to ensure a fair process takes place.Thank you for this opportunity to speak and to protect our peace, reasonable quiet, and property value. PETE SALANT, LCSW LICENSED CLINICAL SOCIAL WORKER PSYCHOTHERAPIST 2904 Brighton Beach PI.Apt. 207 Virginia Beach VA 23451 Phone: 757.285.8900 Fax: 757.932.5432 1 item vv esumnster Lanteroury on sape axe nay TO: Mayor Robert M.Dyer,Virginia Beach Virginia Beach City Council Members Virginia Beach Planning Commission Members Via Email FROM: Michael Peter"Pete"Salant,LCSW Stacey L. Salant,Ph.D. 2904 Brighton Beach Pl.,Unit 207 Virginia Beach VA 23451 DATE: February 29,2020 RE: Westminster Canterbury Expansion Plans In a clandestine process in which minimal information has been revealed, Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay has proposed to build a 22 story residential tower, a 399 car garage, and enclosed walkways over Ocean Shore Avenue, less than 500 feet from our Vineyard at Seashore condo unit.A 7 story assisted living and memory center building is to be built still closer to our home, less than 300 feet from our condo unit. We firmed up our plans to purchase the condo before we were made aware of the proximity, rapid forward movement, and covert details of Westminster Canterbury's project.While the project's representatives have stated that our property values will actually go up once the planned project is complete,we know that is a ridiculous statement which contradicts all conventional wisdom.We are very concerned about our property value,as well as the loss of the peaceful nature of our neighborhood. We would like to share our specific objections to Westminster Canterbury's published expansion plans, along with recommendations for some level of amelioration: • The 22 story tower will cast a shadow across our west-facing balcony and windows, creating a dark interior to what is currently a bright, well-lit unit. The tower must be relocated to be immediately adjacent to the current Westminster Canterbury towers, creating a contiguous 3-tower cluster which will present a less disturbing land- scape.This configuration could help to curtail the predicted increase in ground winds and downdrafts as well. • 22 stories is absurdly tall.At this height, the new tower will look preposterous against our beautiful bay. The new tower building must be no more than 14 stories, the same height as the other 2 towers in the Westminster Canterbury cluster. • If constructed primarily of glass, as proposed,the new tower will be a new source of radiated,reflected heat to our bay,beach and shoreline. It will have a negative impact on our neighboring residence buildings, while killing many birds as it fails to warn them of its presence. • Ocean Shore Avenue is not wide enough to comfortably permit two-way traffic in its current configuration.Moving the proposed new tower and memory center building closer to the current Westminster Canterbury complex will encourage traffic entering and leaving the new buildings to use Starfish Road instead.Ocean Shore Avenue cannot carry the increased traffic load. • Aside from the unavoidable construction noise which will create years of noise disturbance in our neighborhood, Westminster Canterbury appears to have laid out their proposed additions to protect their own residents from the noise produced by their generators,HVAC machinery,delivery vehicles and other unwanted noise sources,causing the noise they create to spread out over the adjacent residential area. • Westminster Canterbury has not demonstrated how they will be processing and eliminating waste,preventing pollution of the water of the bay, keeping noise from exceeding residential area limits,preserving safe traffic levels and pedestrian safety,maintaining unrestricted community access to the beach,and any and all disruption to our neighborhood beyond that which currently exists. Impartial studies of all of these factors must be required. We do not see results of any independent,third-party studies of any of the factors that will negatively affect us and our neighbors.Westminster Canterbury must be required to conduct impartial studies of noise,light,beach access,bay level rise,and all of the other factors listed. Pete&Stacey Salant 2904 Brighton Beach Pl.,Unit 207 Virginia Beach VA 23451 PeteSalant@gmail.com Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: Janine Schwartz <jdscota@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2020 1:48 PM To: City Council; branch.oliver@gmail.com; Planning Administration;William R. Landfair; paulterkeltaub@me.com Subject: OPPOSITION TO WCCB CURRENT EXPANSION PLANS CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. My family and I have lived in the Lynnhaven Colony for 25 years. Since our move we've been waiting for pedestrian friendly sidewalks and aesthetic uniformity. Recently,the city has allowed the monstrosity Overture, and Marina Shores to build to maximum capacity. While this may benefit your coffers the quality and safety to the residents has declined,increased traffic, noise, unsafe/ugly side walks. Where is the charm? Have you heard the ole adage "Less is more"? We will also will be expecting new hotels customers on top of WMC 24 stories,too much! Sent from my iPhone i Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: Todd and Jenifer Solomon <gone2beach@cox.net> Sent: Friday, March 6, 2020 11:58 AM To: Planning Administration; branch.oliver@gmail.com Cc: William R. Landfair; City Council; galcarazvbpc@icloud.com;wgrahamVBPC@icloud.com; horsley_don@yahoo.com; mainman@inmanstrickler.com; dredmondvbpc@icloud.com;johnhcoston@gmail.com; RKleinVBPC@icloud.com;jckwall@aol.com; dweiner@batchelder-brick.com; Mark E. Shea; 'Phil Davenport; 'Tim Solanic - Shore Drive Community Coalition'; EMunden@aol.com; 'Kathleen Damon' Subject: Request Denial of Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay(WCCB) Proposed Expansion Importance: High CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Ms. Oliver and Planning Commission Members, On behalf of the Shore Drive Community Coalition (SDCC), we formally request that the Planning Commission "DENY"the subject request from Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay(WCCB)for a modification of conditions to build a 4 story parking garage with 22 story tower senior living facility and a 7 story memory unit facility connected by enclosed elevated pedestrian bridges over public roadways. The SDCC is a 20 year old umbrella civic organization representing many neighborhood civic leagues, condo and homeowner associations along the Shore Drive corridor. At our February general meeting, we unanimously voted on the following motion regarding the current proposed WCCB development, "The Shore Drive Community Coalition opposes the Westminster Canterbury expansion proposal as it is in violation of the Shore Drive Overlay density restrictions and the Business 901 height restrictions" We understand that it's the Planning Commission responsibility to review projects and determine if they are in accordance with existing City codes and to allow variances based on hardships. As our motion states, the proposed project is considered multi-family senior living housing that violates the following City codes and has no hardships. • Shore Drive Corridor Overlay Section 1704- Density requirements of maximum 24 units per acre. • Business District Section 901—Senior housing building height restriction of 165 feet. The SDCC feels that this project would also set a harmful precedent for future development requests of high density tower structures in Business B2 and B4 zoning that would be incompatible with the surrounding residential and lower density multi-family dwellings that make the Shore Drive Corridor unique. 1 Item 4:Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay Thank you for your consideration in denying the subject application, Todd Solomon—SDCC President 2 item'+: vv estmmster t„anteroury on ,nesapeaxe nay I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed Westminster Canterbury expansion plan as presented. I fully understand WC has the right to build on the property; that was understood when WC bought the property; however, the magnitude of this proposal and the negative impacts this proposal will have on the adjacent communities and environment is profound if allowed to proceed as proposed. Modifications in height, size, density, location and materials are necessary to be compatible with the existing community. I am 76 years old and a cancer survivor. I bought my Ocean Shore Condo in April 2005; have lived here for 15 years. Like many people, my home is my largest investment which when sold, was to provide me with financial resources for future needs. That plan is now in serious jeopardy based on the magnitude, and layout of the proposed WC expansion and I do not have a lot of time to rebuild net worth. It appears this expansion plan was developed with neither regard for nor any consideration of the immediately adjacent neighbors. WC invited Ocean Shore Condominium owners to attend a presentation of the expansion plans Dec. 17, 2019. That was the first time our community was informed of the expansion plans although we are immediately next door to the proposed 22 story reflective glass tower location. We subsequently learned WC had been working with VB City offices on this project for over a year. Mark Borst, WC Vice President of Development and General Services made the presentation and announced to us that this proposal would be before the Planning Commission on Jan. 8, 2020. The strategy was clear. The plans were presented, not for input or comment but as the "plan." Loss of Ocean Shore property values is inevitable as the most negative elements of the layout and design plan as shown on WC conceptual drawings are placed to the total advantage of WC and their residents and to the total disadvantage of Ocean Shore Condominium owners. Please consider the following as you review and make your recommendations regarding WC's Modification of Conditional Use Permit Application. The 22 story reflective glass tower is not compatible with the community. It far exceeds the height of any building on the bay and the glass construction is not in keeping with existing structures. Senior housing is limited by City Code, to a height of 165 feet. If allowed, it could set a precedent that would forever change the character of the bay front communities. The building height needs Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay to be reduced to a compatible height with the surrounding community buildings. All of the negative operational elements of the building have been placed on the East side of the tower immediately next to Ocean Shore condo buildings; the fire suppression room, loading dock, garbage and recycling pick-up, water room, the service road for the building. This puts the subsequent consistent activity and resultant noise and exhaust from delivery vehicles, garbage trucks, recycling trucks, etc right by the bedrooms, kitchen, dining room and living room of Ocean Shore condo units; exhaust could penetrate these homes. This situation has to be mitigated so that Ocean Shore owners' health is not put at risk and they are able to open their windows and sit on their balconies. The WC expansion should not be allowed to restrict owners' ability to live in and use their homes. The location of the tower and the flats need to be flipped and moved closer to the existing WC buildings. Mark Borst stated the reason the tower is located where proposed is to not block the views of units in the WC east wing of the original building. It is ok to destroy ours. Will a big business be allowed to just step on and screw existing homeowners who have been in place for many years? Changes need to be made to minimize the negative impacts on adjacent condo property values and on the quality of life of the condo owners. The reflective glass construction is problematic. It increases the solar radiation directed toward the east and south and onto Ocean Shore buildings. We just replaced the flat roof covering and asphalt shingles on our buildings. Will the increased heat damage the roofing materials? Will it melt the vinyl siding on our buildings. The reflection could also be blinding to drivers heading east on the Lesner bridge in the afternoon. How much increase of sun exposure to humans will be created by the reflection? The percentage of glass needs to be reduced to less than 30% to protect surrounding buildings in accordance with other high-rise residential buildings such as the Hilton at the oceanfront and the Westin at the town center. The reflective glass towner as proposed is in the Atlantic Flyway for Migratory Birds which will result in lethal interactions between migratory birds and the tower and also for our shore birds. Ospreys dive for fish and take them to their nest to feed young, eagles fish in the bay, pelicans fish and fly along the coast along with gulls, cormorants and other species. The reflective glass will look like open space to the birds with disastrous results. The tower cannot be a death Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake bay trap for birds. Reduce the height, reduce the amount of glass and use designs recommended by the American Bird Conservancy. The proximity of the 22 story tower to existing Ocean Shore buildings will result in increased wind speeds between the tower and the OS buildings. We can easily have 50 mph gust with summer afternoon thunderstorms. What will the speed be between the buildings at that rate? And with tropical storm force winds? A study needs to be completed to determine the velocity increases of a range of wind speeds and the resultant potential damage to Ocean Shore Condo buildings. WC proposes to move the public beach access currently located between Case del Playa and the FH parking lot to the west of the Ocean Shore property line immediately adjacent to our fence; The current location accesses the beach on the west side of the "pier"; the proposed location accesses beach on the east side of the "pier". This difference is significant as the closest beach access on the west side of the "pier"would then be at Kleen Street, two condo communities west of WC. This in effect would create a private beach for WC as not many people will likely choose to carry their beach "stuff" under the pier to the beach west of the "pier". They will turn east to enjoy the beach thus creating a private beach for WC. WC recently re-striped the old Lynnhaven FH parking lot; numbered parking spaces and identified 13 parking spaces for contractors which they placed right beside 2428 Ocean Shore Crescent, right beside our balconies and along the side of our building. Of all of the spaces in that lot, they put the contractors under our noses and as far away as possible from anything WC values. They could have put them in the middle of the lot not close to anyone. Contractors come in early in the morning, sit in their trucks, keep the engine running and many smoke. All of the fumes and smoke come right up into the units. WC presents itself as being a good neighbor. It is not Mary Sykes 2428 Ocean Shore Cres. #401 Virginia Beach, VA 23451 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: Planning Administration Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020 11:13 AM To: William R. Landfair Subject: FW:Westminster Canterbury Expansion Bill, Here is an email of opposition for Westminster Canterbury. Sent in the Planning Admin inbox on 3/4/2020. BMarchelle L. Coleman, City Planner II City of Virginia Beach Virginia Beach Planning & Community Development 2875 Sabre Street, Suite 500 Virginia Beach, VA 23452 (757) 385-8557 (Direct) (757) 385-4621 (Office) mcoleman vbgov.com From:Susan Tapper<susanit12003@yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2020 12:50 PM To: Bob M. Dyer<BDyer@vbgov.com>;James L. Wood <JLWood@vbgov.com>;Jessica Abbott<jabbott@vbgov.com>; Michael Berlucchi <mberlucc@vbgov.com>; Barbara Henley<BHenley@vbgov.com>; Louis R.Jones<LRJones@vbgov.com>;John Moss<JDMoss@vbgov.com>; Aaron R. Rouse <ARouse@vbgov.com>; Guy K. Tower<gtower@vbgov.com>; Rosemary C. Wilson <RCWilson@vbgov.com>; Sabrina D. Wooten <swooten@vbgov.com>; galcarazbpc@icloud.com; wgrahamnVBPC@icloud.com; horsleydon@yahoo.com; mainman@inmanstrickler.com; branch.oliver@gmail.com; dredmondvbpc@icloud.com;johnhcoston@gmail.com; rjklein@gmail.com;jckwall@aol.com; dweiner@bachelderbrick.com Subject: Westminster Canterbury Expansion CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. I am an owner at Ocean Shore Condominium and am writing to tell you of my discontent with the expansion plans 1 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay for Westminster Canterbury. There are so many disagreeable ideas, but I will just tell you a few that worry me. First, there is the height of the planned building from their already 14 story building to a 22 story building. This is not compatible with the entire bay front area. It will not enhance our area, but be an eyesore. It also makes no sense for it to be made of glass and not brick like the current campus. The glare and wind problems with a building of that height and material will affect the entire beach community. Their plan to put the taller building closer to Ocean Shore Condominiums serves their vision for the benefit of their people, but directly affects the people living in Ocean Shore and obstructing our view. It is most upsetting that it took so long for this information to be distributed to us and clearly they assumed it was a done deal. I hope that the planning commission and council members will act responsibly and take our concerns under advisement. Thank you. Sincerely, Susan Tapper 2 1LC111 t. V V CS1111111JLC1 L.d11LC1 UUI y Ull l.d1CJdpCd1C Dd William R. Landfair From: Paul Terkeltaub <paulterkeltaub@icloud.com> Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2020 9:44 AM To: William R. Landfair Subject: Westminster Canterbury Proposed Expansion CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Paul Terkeltaub 2416 Ocean Shore Crescent#302 Virginia Beach, Va. 23451 Dear Mr. Landfair, I am writing in reference to my concerns about the Westminster Canterbury expansion. I have many concerns about this proposed project, but I will preface all of this with my tremendous disappointment in the fact that Westminster Canterbury did not share any of their plans with the surrounding community before submitting the information formally to the city for approval. This is despite the fact that Westminster Canterbury has shared with us that they have been in talks with the city for over a year. Most of the objections that I am going to express below and objections that you are going to have from other Virginia Beach residents that surround Westminster Canterbury could have been avoided or mitigated if Westminster Canterbury had just communicated with the community prior to launching such a large project that is going to impact the entire Shore Drive community and the skyline of Virginia Beach. Please find below a list of bullet points of my concerns for this project. I will state each concern individually and then give a little overview of each concern. Otherwise, this letter would be to onerous to read. • The height of this building is a major concern. The height is out of line with the entire community and violates Business 901 height restrictions for the Shore Drive area. • The building as proposed will also violate the Shore Drive overlay district density restrictions. Depending on the final numbers the proposed population of the building will violate the density restrictions anywhere from 200%to 300%of the current allowable density. • The area is also right in the path of the Atlantic Flyway for migratory birds. A glass building of 22 stories will negatively impact the birds migration. Since we have already seen a 25%decrease in the bird population during the past 50 years in this country. This will give the birds one more obstacle that does not seem prudent. This is on top of the fact that the Hampton Roads Bridge Tunnel expansion has eliminated the habitat for more than 25,000 birds. i 11C111'f: VV CSLIIIIIISIC1 1.a111C1 UUl y 1111 V11CJapCd1C Day • We have asked for a wind study to be done on this building and have not seen that study as of yet. After the last expansion of Westminster Canterbury a major change in the wind for our area occurred. This has resulted in erosion of the beach. Another building of even a larger size will exacerbate this problem. It is unconscionable that this project has been allowed to advance to this stage without a wind study being required. • We have asked for a solar/sun study to be conducted. It is imperative that we find out how much heat a 22 glass building will project on the community. Will it radiate so much heat that it will ruin roofs of buildings surrounding Westminster Canterbury. Will it damage the siding of buildings next to Westminster? What precautions have been taken to mitigate the damage caused by the reflection of a 22 story glass building? • How will the light from a 22 story glass building impact the neighborhood. How much light will shine from the building at night? Will this light negatively impact the neighbors? • The sheer height of the building and the location of the building is also a major concern of the neighborhood. The building has been positioned as far away from their current tower as possible. The representative of Westminster Canterbury, Mark Borst,VP of Development&General Services when pressed stated in a community meeting that they positioned the building in that way to protect the views of their residents. Although this is nice in theory, it is totally inappropriate to protect the views of their residents at the expense of the views of the surrounding community. • The other thing that has been done to protect Westminster Canterbury residents at the expense of the community is to place all of the services required by a large building on the outside of the property against neighbor's properties instead of integrating this infrastructure within their property. This includes loading docks for all types of trucks and service vehicles, air conditioning units that will project noise onto the surrounding community, emergency diesel generators that will project noise onto the community,trash collection and dumpsters, entrance areas for ambulances,fire trucks and other emergency vehicles. This entire project was designed to push the noise and inconvenience out to the community and protect Westminster Canterbury residents. Once again, a noise pollution study should have been required by the city of Westminster Canterbury before this project advanced this far. • Currently there is a beach access owned by the city that is between La Playa and the old Lynnhaven Fish House. They are proposing moving this beach access to the east side of their property right up against Ocean Shore Condos. This will once again benefit Westminster Canterbury at the expense of the neighborhood. This will create a private beach for Westminster Canterbury that the neighbors will not be able to access. Moving this beach access will also move the noise that is caused by a beach access from their property to Ocean Shore Condos. Westminster Canterbury promotes themselves as a smoke free facility. However,the reason they are a smoke free facility is because they force their employees to go out to the beach access to smoke. Currently this occurs in the middle of their property. If they move the beach access to the east side of the property up against Ocean Shore Condos this will just move all of the smokers right next to Ocean Shore Condos. Once again, protecting the residents of Westminster Canterbury at the expense of the community. Finally,this will make Ocean Shore Condo the only property in Virginia Beach to have a beach access on both sides of their property. Currently there is a beach access on the east side of Ocean Shore Condo. If we have a beach access on the west side this will once again negatively impact the surrounding properties to the benefit of Westminster Canterbury. • Traffic is going to be another major problem during construction and once this project is complete. Although a traffic study has been done it has been based on some inappropriate assumptions. If the assumptions are corrected, I believe the city would realize the current roads cannot handle a new project this size. The flaws that exist in the current traffic study are as follows. A)Westminster Canterbury assumes that the driving patterns of the new owners for the new building will be the same as their current residents. Nothing could be farther from the truth.The current residents have been aging in place and many no longer drive. When the new building is occupied the new residents will be younger than their current population. Most will have two cars and most will still be driving. In addition,there have been three other majors projects that have been built in the Shore Drive area recently and have not been competed or filled with owners and renters.The three properties are The Overature, Point Chesapeake on The Bay and The Pearl on Great Neck Road. Once completed these properties will also be contributing to the increased traffic in the Shore Drive District. The current traffic study does not take these other properties into consideration. 2 - -1 -- - r- - -I • The parking garage is woefully inadequate for the population of the building both in size and design. Although the garage meets city standards it will not meet the needs of the new residents of Westminster Canterbury. We have had our architect look at this parking garage and he has pointed out to us multiple issues of concern. 1)The slope of the entrance is on an 8%grade instead of 4%. This will mean that when driving into the building you will not be able to see the top of the ramp. A problem for the best drives. An impossible problem for seniors. 2)The parking spaces are built to the minimum requirement by the city. This to is a problem for seniors that already have compromised driving ability. Finally,the parking will not be adequate for all of the new workers that will be required by the new building. Currently,the employees already park all over the Shore Drive area because there is not enough parking for them on their property. This will just exacerbate the problem. Once again, Mark Borst with Westminster Canterbury assured us that there would be enough parking. Mark stated in a community meeting that there would be enough parking because most residents have only one car or none and that many of their employees take public transportation to get to work. This could not be farther from the truth.The population of the new building will be younger and more mobile.Also, if they can not accommodate the current parking need of their employees how will they be able to accommodate the needs of more employees when the garage does not have enough parking spaces for all of the new owners and new employees. Each of the above problems have solutions, but the only way they can be worked out is by having public meetings so that all of the facts can be understood and suggestions can be offered. We have been in touch with different members of the planning commission. Even the planning commission does not know all of the details of this project. We were told that they did not have to know all of the details to vote on this project. I feel it is inconceivable for a project this size to be allowed to move forward without full details being disclosed, a full public airing of the details,with public input and the appropriate care being taken to protect the current residents of Shore Drive. Very Truly Yours, Paul Paul Terkeltaub (757) 630-3774 3 11G111 Y. V1 GJ1111111JLG1 Va11LG1 VW.Y Vll V11GJa�/GQAG l)a�' William R. Landfair From: Bryan Weisberg <bryan.weisberg@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, February 29, 2020 6:22 PM To: Bob M. Dyer;James L.Wood;Jessica Abbott; Michael Berlucchi; Barbara Henley; Louis R.Jones;John Moss;Aaron R. Rouse;Guy K.Tower; Rosemary C.Wilson; Sabrina D.Wooten; galcarazbpc@icloud.com;wgrahamnVBPC@icloud.com; horsley_don@yahoo.com; mainman@inmanstrickler.com; branch.oliver@gmail.com;dredmondvbpc@icloud.com;johnhcoston@gmail.com; rjrklein@gmail.com; jckwall@aol.com;dweiner@bachelderbrick.com;William R. Landfair Subject: Opposition to Westminster Canterbury Expansion CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach.Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Mr. Mayor, Council Members, and the VA Beach Planning Commission, I am writing to you as a concerned Virginia Beach homeowner about the expansion of the Westminster Canterbury in the Shore Drive community. Through my association, I have received plans for the retirement community's massive building project. Over the past years, I have watched as the Westminster Canterbury executed hostile takeovers of the condominiums nearby and then bought and shut down the Lynnhaven Fish House, a historic favorite among locals. At the same time, the retirement community's residents, who rarely leave the confines of the complex, do little to support the community as a whole. The latest project they intend to build would negatively impact the Shore Drive community and set a dangerous precedent for future building projects along the beach. I am opposed for the following reasons: The 22 story tower would cast a shadow over the beach for a large portion of the year. Traffic would drastically increase on the already busy Shore Drive as well as the idyllic Ocean Shore Drive. The glass face of the building could provide dangerous reflections to people along the beach as well as the roads. The proposed sky walk over the road and the parking garage will transform a once quiet neighborhood into an ugly, commercial thoroughfare. Moving the public beach access will in effect create a private beach on public land. Finally, allowing a massive structure to be built right next to the Ocean Shores Condominium complex is insulting to the citizens that make their homes there and makes me wonder if the same could happen to me. We chose to buy homes in this area because we wanted to live somewhere relatively quiet and near the beach. If we wanted to live next to skyscrapers, we would have bought homes on the Oceanfront. I look forward to see you all fight for the Virginia Beach residents and oppose the current plans for the Westminster Canterbury. If you would like to reach me for further information, I can be reached at the contact information below. Regards, Bryan Weisberg i , 1 / 2423 Ships Watch Court VA Beach, VA 23451 Bryan.weisberg@gmail.com 609-827-5915 2 Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: Linda Wheeler <Iwheeler55@hotmail.com> Sent: Sunday, March 8, 2020 7:32 PM To: William R. Landfair Subject: Westminster Canterbury expansion CAUTiora. This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Sir: I am writing as a resident/owner of Ocean Shore Condos next to the proposed expansion of Westminster Canterbury. All the residents of our community will be greatly and negatively impacted by these plans of a 22 story building next to our complex. This is unacceptable in its current proposal, and many changes must be made in order to preserve the currently peaceful beach, provide traffic and parking controls, and ensure that our bayfront communities do not have to endure the arrogance of the owners of this complex, who have no right to blatantly and without regard for the owners who live here, to encroach on our communities. Virginia Beach has done a good job in protecting the North End residential communities from huge buildings being built next to their homes and condos. Now it is time for city leaders to do the same to protect our Bayfront Communities! Noise, lack of proper roads and parking, trash removal, utility concerns, employees standing &gathering on Ocean Shore Avenue, and possibly even onto our private property are a great concern to us. We want at a minimum, if this building is even approved, to be reduced in height from 22 stories to 14 stories, that a proper parking garage or other acceptable parking, is put on the property, and the other important and legitimate concerns as outlined in letters already sent to the Planning Commission and City Council members, are taken into account and REQUIRED TO BE ADHERED TO by Westminster Canterbury. Do not be swayed by the crowd of people that might show up on their behalf to your meetings - they are alot bigger than we are and consider themselves immune to the little guys (us), the HOMEOWNERS and constituents of Virginia Beach, and will expect leaders to just bow down and approve whatever they want. Take into account all the requests our attorneys and very concerned residents will be making. Thank you. A CITIZEN, taxpayer, and lifelong resident of Virginia Beach. Linda S. Wheeler i Item 4: Westminster Canterbury on Chesapeake Bay William R. Landfair From: Michael Wills <mwills98@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2020 12:17 PM To: City Council; branch.oliver@gmail.com; Planning Administration;William R. Landfair; paulterkeltaub@me.com Subject: OPPOSITION TO WCCB CURRENT EXPANSION PLANS CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. This plan is absurd. I am all for new develop and progress but this is not compatible with the existing community and therefore I am opposed. Thanks, Mike 1