Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMARCH 2, 1988 M I N U T E S VIRGINIA BEACH CITY COUNCIL Virginia Beach, Virginia March 2, 1988 The PUBLIC @TING of the VIRGINIA BEACH CITY COUNCIL relative the COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE was called to order by Vice Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf @In VIRGINIA BEACH JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL on March 2, 1988 at 7:00 P.M. Council Members Present: Albert W. Balko, Robert E. Fentress, Barbara M. Henley, Reba S. McClanan, John D. Moss, Vice Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf and Nancy K. Parker Council Members Absent: John A. Baum, Mayor Robert G. Jones, Harold Heischober and John L. Perry City Staff Present: Clay Bernick, Patrick Janezeck, Pamela Lingle, Bob Macali, Robert Scott, Ruth Hodges Smith, David Sullivan and City Manager Aubrey Watts - 2 - Item I.B. ITEM # 28939 The following spoke relative the COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE: Gerald Divaris, Chairman, Central Business District Association of Virginia Beach. Gerald Divaris cited recommendations to incorporate into the CZO as far as the Central Business District Zoning was concerned. Paul Farrell, President TIDEWATER BUILDERS ASSOCIATION, 2117 Smith Avenue, Chesapeake 23320, Phone: 420-2434 and expressed views of the TBA relative four portions of the CZO Joseph W. Hood, Jr., President, North Virginia Beach Civic League, and spoke relative the new R-5R Zoning Category. Joseph W. Hood advised of three areas requested for change: 40% lot coverage, the 5,000 square foot minimum lot size and a new addition concerning maximum floor area. Walt Vargo, 124 Settler Court, represented the Citizens Action Coalition, and advised any housing to necessitate quality should contain at least a 10,000 square foot lot. Compliments were extended to the Planning Staff and the HMP Committee Bartow H. "Pat" Bridges, requested the impact of aesthetics be considered in all deliberations Richard Grimstead, Architect, 2102 Mediterranean Avenue, Phone: 422-4791, advised the only hotel correctly built in Virginia Beach is the Old Cavalier Ronald D. Morrison, 1105 Brattleboro Avenue, Phone: 467-4738 (H) 490-3141 (0), urged consideration of the economic consequences in the adoption of the proposed land use regulations. Larry R. Van Nostrand, 413 23rd Street, Phone; 428-1287, expressed concern relative the inconsistency in the placement of R-1 through R-4 zoning. Anne J. Henry, 506 27th Street, Phone: 428-5962 (H), 427-4856 (0), resident of the Virginia Beach Borough since 1939. Anne Henry had expressed agreement with eliminating the RT-4 designation. The entire area of 22nd Street northward to approximately 28th Street should remain residential. The RT designations should not extend more than about 'half way westward in the 300 block. Betty Lou Connell, 409-23rd Street, Phone: 428-1562, resident since 1936, and requested a complete WORKSHOP for the Beach Borough residents. Roger Newill, 1257 E. Bayshore Phone: 425-1624, represented the Resort Area Advisory Commission, and reiterated three main goals: (1) Allow convention oriented hotels, (2) Allow choices toward parking, (3) Create a mechanism for open space to occur. Attorney R. J. Nutter, II, 1613 Cuttysark Road, Phone: 481-6631, urged promotion and encouraging of convention hotels in the Resort Area. Bob Briner, 2040 Thomas Bishop Lane, Phone: 498-7000 (0) 496-6040 (H), Member of the Municipal Affairs Committee and the Tidewater Board of Realtors, expressed concern relative maintenance of homes and police and fire protection for areas which seem to have only one entrance into their development. Louise M. White, 430 26th Street, Phone: 422-3322, advised she did not see any advertising for the PUBLIC HEARINGS relative the CZO and requested personal notice. Louise White also requested business districts not be instilled in their neighborhood. Michael J. Barrett, 1829 Eden Way, Phone: 481-6388 (H) 490-7373 (0), represented the Runnymede Corporation and expressed concern relative the physical impact of the large lots on the City, and how it would price young and older buyers out of the market. The Runnymede Corporation supported the recommendations of the Planning Commission in the establishment of the RT-3 Resort Tourist District. George Taylor, Jr., 117 79th Street, Phone: 428-1325, expressed concerns relative transportation. 3 Item I.B. ITEM 28939 (Continued) Ralph De Marco, 319 22nd Street, Phone: 482-2608, advised he has resided in the beach since 1949 and requested the zoning remain the same in this particular area. Jan Kitchin, 315 26th Street, Phone: 425-1842, resident in the old Beach Borough for approximately 25 years. Jan Kitchin requested the Notice for Public Hearings relative the CZO be more prominently displayed, perhaps a notice be sent with the Tax Bills and the maps relative the CZO be published in the BEACON. Lou Pace, resident of Hunt Club Forest, Phone: 468-0925. Lou Pace requested guidelines for fencing and supported the 10,000 square foot lot Patty Masterson, 103 58th Street, Phone: 428-1760. Patty Masterson spoke in support of the R-5 zoning, particularly in respect to the 40% footprint. Larry Bloom, resident at the North End of Virginia Beach, requested the North End retain its status quo. It will definitely be an economic impact if any changes are made to reduce the density of the lot coverage. There being no further speakers, the Vice Mayor CLOSED the PUBLIC MEETING at 9:15 P.M- and expressed appreciation to all in attendance for their views. Vice Mayor Oberndorf ANNOUNCED a PUBLIC MEETING is SCHEDULED, at 7:00 P.M. on Thursday, March 10, 1988 at KERPSVILLE HIGH SCHOOL. @th Hodge@Smith, CMC City Clerk B ve @o@ Chief Deputy City Clerk PUBLIC MEETING 7 p.m. March 2, 1988 Virginia Beach Junior High School City Council City Staff Al Balko Aubrey Watts John Moss Ruth Smith Barbara Henley Robert Scott Meyera Oberndorf David Sullivan Gary Fentress Pat Janezeck Nancy Parker Pam Lingle Reba McClanndn Clay Bernick Bob McCalli Meyera Oberndorf: It is now 10 minutes after seven and you all have been gracious enough to take your valuable time to come out and we did call this public hearing for 7 p.m. I would like to get it started. I feel certain that the members of Council who are missing will be filtering in as the evening wears on. To those of you who have come tonight to this public hearing so that the Council members can hear what you, the public, would like to see addressed in the zoning ordinance. I would like to call our Planning Director, Mr. Robert Scott, to the podium first to give him the opportunity to make a very brief presentation. If you all have more specific questions, I am sure, after the hearing is over, he will be glad to try and address them. Robert Scott: I think the best way to start would be with a historical perspective that we have here and exactly what it is we do have. In 1973, the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance as it now exists, was adopted by the Council, when our City's population was about 200,000 people. We now have almost twice that many people living in our City. In that 14 or 15 years that hdS 90ne by, the nature of the City and our problems is chdnging rapidly. The Planning Comission dnd City Council have worked for quite some time to evaluate the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance as it exists and the literally several hundred changes that have been made to this since 1973 and to reorgdnize and redirect some of the regulations that are pertained in them. This meeting tonight, held in the Beach Borough, is appropriate because many of the changes that have been contemplated both by the Planning Comission and the City Council have quite a bit to do with the Beach Borough. Next Thursday night, on the 10th, we will hold a similar meeting in the Kempsville area. I am sure there will be other concerns at that time. The Planning Commission, in September, in accordance with State law, sent d recommendation to the City Council, a revised draft of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. We had versions of this available. There are some copies that we have with us tonight if someone needs an extra copy. In the future, if necessary, we will print more and we will have them available in our department at City Hall. Also, they are available in all of our City libraries. They are dvailable for use and reference at the City Hall as well. Since September, when that draft was presented to City Council by the Planning Commission, the City Council has looked at the matter itself, studied in great depth, the provisions thdt are put forth in the draft dnd hdS suggested possible changes above and beyond those Public Meeting - CZO March 2, 1988 Page Two made by the Planning Commission. We have available, or can make available to the public that wishes, a list of some of those concerns. It needs to be emphasized that the Council has yet to, as a whole, express its position on any of those. It wishes merely to put them forward for public consideration dnd discussion at this point. Time will come in the near future for positions to be taken and adoption of one version or the other in the near future. Because this particular hearing tonight is held in the Virginia Beach Borough and beCdUse many of the changes that have been suggested have to do with zoning in the resort area, I have brought a map which is up here. Mdny of you hdve dlready looked at it. That constitutes a version separate from the Planning Commission's version. It constitutes a slightly different version of where on the ground these various proposed districts ought to be. Once again, that needs to be emphasized that there has been no one that has endorsed or recommended or stands behind this version. It is merely put forward for consideration or discussion, at least at this point. The various points in the documents have been discussed at great lengths in public hearings and forums at City Hall by Planning Commission and Council and various subcommittees thereof for some time now. I do not see what purpose is concerned to go over that in detdil except that the Planning Comission, prior to its intent for adoption, held a number of public hearings and received comments and incorpordted, with the intent it saw prdctical, those coments into its draft. Before anY dction is taken, or even scheduled by the City Council, I think it would be appropriate once again, to invite the public to comment and ask questions on whatever aspect of these proposals or ideas, as the public sees fit. I am sure the Council will assist in answering those responses and proceeds as wishes. Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Bernick and I are here to answer or respond in any way that the Council wishes us to tonight. So let me stand aside and let that serve as an introduction to tonight's performance. Should you need us for anything, we will be here to respond. Mrs. Oberndorf: Thank you very much Mr. Scott. We have with us, our City Clerk, so if when you come forth to testify, just give us your ndme so that when we listen to your testimony, we will be able to connect it to a face. Gerald Divaris: Members of Council, I am Gerald Divaris, the Chairman of the Central Business District Association of Virginia Beach. Before I begin my prepared remarks, I would like to publicly thank the members of the Planning Commission for incorporating two of the association's recommendations to the ordinance that is being recommended to you for approval. Those were the reductions of the sign setbacks and the increase in the ..inaudible...The association has worked diligently towards the goal of establishing a true city center for Virginia Beach. A vibrant and exciting place where people can work and shop in a true urban environment. In a relatively short period of time, the association has accomplished a great deal. Membership in the association has now reached 120. We have recently employed a tedm of consultants who have prepared a study for the Central Business District and will generate a Public Meeting - CZO March 2, 1988 Page Three tremendous amount of publicity which affects...inaudible... I am pleased to tell you that at the end of this month we will be cooperating with the City's Economic Development Department in San Francisco in trying to sell Virginia Beach and attrdct businesses to the City. Our success with that is a cledr indication thdt Virginia Beach, dS it continues to prosper and grow, maturing as well. Support from the City, and particularly the City Manager, Aubrey Watt and his Planning Director, Bob Scott, has been extremely gratifying. We look forward to the continudtion of this cooperation. As the association continues to strive towards its goal of a true city center, a heart or soul for our City, we would respectively request that the City Council consider severdl additional recomendations to incorporate it into the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance as fdr as the Central Business District zoning is concerned. These recommendations were drafted by the association's zoning task force dnd have been unanimously approved by the dSSOCidtion's board of directors. I might add that these recommendations apply only to the Central Business District zoned area. First, compact cars. The official recognition by the City of Virginia Beach of the existence of compact cars would greatly enhance the development of the CBD. Many cities across the country, including Norfolk, have specific compact car requirements. These requirements were implemented in an effort to conserve dvailable land. With CBD, the dSSOCiation recomends as an 18 by 17 foot parking area for 50% of the required parking spaces. In lieu of the present trends and the order of your design, the association strongly believes that such requirements would be more than adequate to serve the special development needs within the CBD. In addition, the implementation of these requirements would allow developers to provide more green open space, thus improving the aesthetic quality of the CBD and its environment dnd allow more land for cultural and civic uses. Second, shared parking. The adoption of shared parking regulations in the Central Business District would allow a developer to reduce the on- site parking requirements for d particular project. Shared Pdrking allows mixtures of developments which dre traditionally found in CBDS, peak demand periods for parking, hotels, offices, retail establishments, banks and restdurdnts have different peak periods for parking. Shared parking would allow each of these entities to provide more than adequate pdrking for their customers dt their peak times while reducing the required number of spaces for open areas. In addition, shared pdrking would greatly improve land use and dIlOW for a more urban city. Thirdly, the reduction of a number of required bays per 1000 squdre feet. This ties in with the future parking garage which we expect will come into being in the CBD as well as the satellite parking which does and is permitted on the resort strip area. The association strongly believes that the car requirement of 2.85 parking bays per 1000 square feet, which has been recommended, by the way, to 4 bays per 1000 square feet, those suitable for suburban areas is not necessarily dppropriate in the Centrdl Business District. The next ... inaudible ... activities filed in the Central Business District result in the cross utilization of parking facilities, carpooling, public transportation usage and therefore the need for less parking bays. In addition, the Central Business Districts Public Meeting - CZO March 2, 1988 Page Four are usually the most successful places for public transportation and the proposed 1 ight rail service and the exi sting bus services... inaudible...The association recommends that the requirements of the Central Business District be reduced from the present request of 4 bays per thousand square feet for the CBD area to either Mdintain the present 2.85 bays per thousand or to increase it no more than 3.2 bays per thousand square feet. This requirement would apply only to the commercial office space and not retail establishments. Those would maintain the present zoning and parking needs. Fourth, floor area ratio, the association strongly believes that the practice of transferring floor area ratio within the Central Business District, should be permitted by the City. Under this plan, which is used by localities across the country, property owners and developers would be allowed to transfer the floor area rdtio that exists that is not being utilized at that time to other properties within the CBD area. This practice would allow the CBD to achieve its area density and to maximize the total value of the land. This would, it turn, enable the City to obtain a tdx base that may have been earmarked by the Central Business District. To give an example of that, Pembroke Mall may not be using its entire, if they are, single story building. If it were possible to transfer the excess, if there is, to adjoining properties that have not yet developed, you could obtain an equal density to what you have... inaudible... and at the same time maximize all this tax base and the value of the land in the drea. The City should develop a Comprehensive Plan of Incentives which could be used, not only to attrdct potential developers to the Central Business District but also from what the public improvements that are much needed in the City to provide developers with incentives, in turn for them, provide the interest that may be necessary. These incentives could include all sorts of ideas, such as tax ...inaudible .... or possibly relaxation on certain requirements. We haven't really developed any specific incentives in mind but that in return for developers providing infrastructure, be it landSCdPing, sky bridges across a major highway, walking ... inaudible... etc., which the localities or cities would provide these developers, would be an incentive...inaudible...what would be minimally provided by the City. Woodstock project in downtown Norfolk is a prime example of what can be accomplished by special ... inaudible...government. The association is convinced that the ... inaudible ... by the City of the Central Business District will produce a significant and positive impact on the City's tax base and enhance the overall quality of life in Virginia Beach. I would like to conclude my remarks by saying that the association is committed to the proper and orderly development of the Central Business District. The adoption of these recommendations will present a giant step towards the realization of this goal. I am confident that you, the members of the City Council will give these recommendations your serious consideration. We, aS dn association, are willing to meet with anybody and everybody to discuss our ideals further and to work with you in obtaining these goals. We truly look forward to the continuation and strengthening of our partnership with the City, as together we can develop an urban City center which will be a gredt source of pride to Public Meeting - CZO Mdrch 2, 1988 Page Five all the citizens of Virginid Beach. Thank you. Mrs. Oberndorf: Does anyone on Council have any questions for Mr. Divaris? Paul Farrell: I dm a resident of Virginid Beach, I live at 1842 York...inaudible...Rosewell Corporation. I am currently president of Tidewater Builders Association. On behalf of the association, I wish to express our views on four portions of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. We support the Planning Commission's reconnendation for a MdXiMUM of 6 townhouses in d row with the setback of 30 feet in front. We believe that this will improve the site plans and will not add excessively to development costs. We support the Planning Commission's recommendation that all property currently zoned R-8 remain developable under the current R-8 regulations. The third item is the stormwater management ordinance. We ask that that be deleted from the CZO, giving us an opportunity to study this further and to participate in workshops with the staff and with our technical people, because this is a highly technical issue. The fourth item is the minimum lot size for the single family home. We support the Planning Comission's recommenddtion that zero lot lines be eliminated and that the front setback be increased to at least 30 feet. However, we oppose the minimum lot size being increased to 6500 square feet. We are suggesting that the minimum size be 5500 square feet with 5 and 10 foot side yard setbacks. Builders today must pay the minimum of 422,000 for a 5,000 square foot lot. The least expensive home that can be built, with this lot cost, usually sells for $85,000 to $90,000. If you increase the minimum lot size to 6500 square feet, the builder's cost of the lot will be approximately $27,000 and the least expensive home price will be in the range of $100,000 to $110,000. There are basically three elements that determine the price of a new home. One is the lot cost. Two are the hard costs. Hard costs means materials and labor. Three, soft cost, meaning such items as interest, overhead, closing costs, commissions and discount points. If the builder's lot cost increases, the price of the finished product also will increase unless the builder constructs SMdller homes or uses lower quality materials. The issue here is affordability. There is a large segment of our population that want and need affordable single family housing. Over the past 7 years, I have built d substantidl number of homes for 5,000 square foot lots. These homes sold in the range of $70,000 to $95,000. Most recently, the price range has been from about $82,000 to $95,000. Being personally involved, I see the buyer profiles including occupations, ages, family income, number of children dnd so forth. Let me share with you some of the information about the people that buy these houses. We compiled the information from 43 sales at a recent subdivision. Eighteen of the 43 buyers were Navy personnel. Seventeen enlisted dnd one officer. The other people who bought the houses had a variety of different occupations. Just to mention a few of those, a minister, a truck driver, civil service employee, a police officer, school tedcher, electronics technician, painter, teacher and coach, data processing Mdnager, U.S. marshdll, a detective, insulation mechdnic, electrical sdles representative, an Public Meeting - CZO March 2, 1988 Page Six electrician, a physical ed coordinator, a department store manager. These buyers ranged in age from 27 to 37 years old. The average family had 2 children. The average home price was $92,000. The average family income was $39,000 and 95% of these buyers were families that both the husband and wife worked. I submit to you that these are equally most affected by the affordability issues. Please consider the needs of these citizens as you weigh the pros and cons of minimum lot sizes. One final comment. A few months ago, the newspaper did a story on Ocean lakes. As most of you know, this is probably one of our largest communities that consists primarily of 5,000 square foot lots. I don't have the article with me but I remember reading it, possibly in August or September. The newspaper sent some reporters down and they interviewed, I guess, a dozen families. They asked them how they liked their homes and how they liked the neighborhood. The response was favorable. I think it is interesting to note that many of the critics of the smaller lot neighborhoods are those who are fortunate enough to live in neighborhoods with larger lots and more expensive homes. Thank you for the opportunity to express our viewpoints. Mrs. Oberndorf: Does anyone have a question, if not, thank you. Joseph W. Hood, Jr.: I am president of the North Virginia Beach Civic League. I am here tonight to express the strong opinion of about 2000 members. Several of our officers and members are here tonight and I would like to ask that they be recognized. I would also like to thank the Planning Department staff and the Pldnning Commission for the hard work they have put into the draft that the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance has gone through. I just hdve one problem with it. They went out of their way to create a special zoning category for North Virginia Beach dnd the Bay area beaches, the new R-5R design to more or less give us something that we supposedly want. The only difficulty I have with it is no one has paid anY dttention whatsoever to the expressed desires of the residents of North Virginia Beach, who constitute the primary owners of this proposed R-5R District. The salient features of R-5R as opposed to R-8 as we now have it are that there are no changes. There are three areds thdt we would like very much to have chdnged and had proposed as changes back when it was still R-8 and before the new zoning ordinance was chdnged. Those concern the current 40% lot coverage, the 5,000 square foot minimum 10t Si2e and we are proposing a new addition concerning maximum floor dred. Currently, a typical North Virginid Beach lot is roughly 50 by 150 feet. On thdt lot, without a varidnce of any sort, it is possible to build a 9,000 square foot house. I put it to you that a 9,000 square foot house does not fit North Virginia Beach. We are proposing that the lot coverage that presently stands at 40% be reduced to 30% and that a new restriction be placed that will allow a maximum floor area in a structure, equal to 200% of the allowed lot coverage. This would work out to a 4500 foot house that could be built on a 5500 foot lot, which I maintain is still a sizeable house on a very small lot. If a person wanted to take it up three floors, they could certainly do that. That is their right. We Public Meeting - CZO March 2, 1988 Page Seven are not complaining about the 35 foot maximum height. They would just have to reduce the footprint of the structure and still keep it within the maximum square footage. We are also proposing that the current 5000 square foot minimum lot size be increased to somewhere between 6500 and 7500. All of North Virginia Beach, all of the Bay area beaches, all of the proposed R-5R areas are currently fully developed. Changing the minimum lot size would hurt no one who lives there now. The only person this could possibly affect is a person who came in and bought several lots with the intention of resubdividing. We have this happening all the time in North Virginia Beach and a few of the areas where there are larger lots. It takes not very much time to drive down Atlantic Avenue now and look on either side of you, specidlly tO the east, and see some of the enormous buildings that have been put up there. I also put to you that that would be a terrifying experience if you lived next door to something like that. I am sure they are very nice houses, they just do not happen to fit on 50 foot lots. We have circuldted numerous petitions among our membership and I will be glad to deliver those to a place of your choosing, either for drama at the Council or to the office to allow Mrs. Smith to collate them for you. We have 755 signatures supporting our position. What we are asking for, once again, is a maximum of 35% lot coverage, at least 6500 foot minimum lot size and 200% floor area restriction. Thank you. I would be glad to answer any questions. Mr. Oberndorf : Thank you Mr. Wood. Any members of Council have questions for Mr. Wood? Walt Vdrgo: I live at 124 Settler Court. I am here representing the Citizen's COdlition. I was going to represent the CCO but Lee Banks told... inaudible... The first thing I would like to do is thank the Planning staff. We found out it is much easier to use the index to find something. Also we would like to compliment Mrs. Barbara Henley's group that did the study effort. They stole our thunder and incorporated a lot of the things that we want to talk about tonight. We particularly want to congratulate you on a fine job and we applaud the renovation of the PDH-2 zoning. We would like to recommend thdt the plats that are platted now under PDH-2 that are not completed, that they be monitored to see that the conditions that apply are enforced. Everybody is hung up on lot sizes it seems like. We would still like to see, on pdges 77 dnd 80, that the size for family homes have a minimum of 10,000 square feet. We didn't pick that figure arbitrarily, we feel that since this new plan is going to affect most of this land south of the Green Line if and when it is developed. The land south of the Green Line is poorly drained, environmentdlly fragile. There are a lot of problems with a SMdll 10t. We think that 10,000 square foot lots minimum should be allowed. Plus, we think that any housing built in the City should be qudlity and we feel that quality has to have at least a 10,000 square foot lot. Plus, we would like to mention that the small lots create problems. You have children pldying in the street all the time because they don't have any room in their yards. It is a hazard and a Public Meeting - CZO March 2, 1988 Page Eight danger to children. We would also like to see a minimum of townhouses, except in the R-10 zoning. Not more than 10 units per acre. We feel that we have a goodly supply of townhouses in the City and don't need any more. Thank you. Mrs. Oberndorf: DO dny members of Council have any questions of Mr. Vargo? Thank you. Barton H. Bridges: Thank you for holding this public hearing to solicit input from the citizens. There dre many of us thdt are concerned about what might happen in our hometown. I am a resident of Mr. Balkols domain, the Gredt Neck Corridor as it is called. I am also a very interested citizen. Some of you may have heard that by the year 2000, the City of Virginia Beach should be the most beautiful city in the United States. I would like to ask that this be a very high priority in not only this deliberation but in all your deliberations. What is going to be the impact of the aesthetics of our hometown in your deliberations? Certainly the things that you are considering tonight, many of them do have an impact. I would like to suggest that a minimum lot size for a single unit home not be 5,000 square feet, not be 5500 square feet, not be 6500 square feet or 7500 square feet. But I do think that 10,000 squdre feet is an appropriate minimum size if we are trying to create an attractive community. I recognize the point that Mr. Farrell has made in that certainly this is going to have an impact on the cost of housing. But throughout the course of the history of Virginia Beach, we have allowed these small homes to be built on small lots. I suggest for those who may be looking for a minimum cost home would be able to find many of the used homes available. So I don't think we would be overlooking that party if we said that future homes would have to be on bigger lots. I do recognize that we want to not exclude minimum income people from having housing. But I think that certainly for a number of years in the immedidte future, that market is existing. I don't think we need to build new homes on small lots. I would like to recommend, in addition, that at least two off street parking spaces for all units of housing, apartments, townhouses or single family be required. I know there are provisions that you all are considering would allow 1 and 112 or some peculiar figure for townhouse and apartment units thdt are larger sizes. In my experience, there seem to be relatively few apartments or townhouse units that don't have two cars. Many of them have 3 dnd 4 cars. If any of those people have company coming, then it is an ungodly mess, as far as the congestion. So I think that 2 off street parking SPdces for any unit is an appropridte consideration. I lived in Washington Square, a complex of townhouses for 6 years. There is an interesting contrast between the units that were built about 15 or so years ago as compared to those that have been built in the last two or three years. I don't really know what the exact categories of density are so I can't give you numbers and initials but I do not that there is an interesting contrast. The older sections, for example, every unit has an alley in the back. And in addition to that, there is off street parking for at least one car in the back of Public Meeting - CZO March 2, 1988 Page Nine every unit. There is a distinct setback from the street back to the building so that there is a nice big green yard in the front of every townhouse in Washington Square. Gdrbage can be taken to the back door and collected by City trucks going down the alley. As I mentioned, every unit has an alley in the back door that is used by the trash collector. That has off street parking. But if you compare that type of construction with the density that has been allowed at the new part of Washington Square, you will see that there are so many units, crdmped so close together, that there is no alley in the back. No access to the backyard of these places. The front yard is almost totally, just under 100% paved with off street parking at whatever the percentage is, 1 and 112 or 1 and 2/3 thirds or something, automobile spaces per unit. So to drive through the new section of Washington Square, and I invite you to do this and compare it with the older section where the density is obviously less than the older section, you will see an interesting contrast. I would suggest that whatever it is that under which the earlier section was built, would be an appropriate criteria for townhouse development. It was very liberal and I enjoyed the StdY there. These are the specific things I wanted to call to your attention. Agdin I thank you for the chance to express my opinion and I do urge you again to keep in mind that an appropriate goal for us to be working for is that Virginid Beach could be the most beautiful city in the United States by the year 2000. Do you have any questions? Mrs. Oberndorf: Any questions? If not, thank you Mr. Bridges. Richard Grimstead: I am an architect at Virginia Beach. I haven't had a whole lot of time to review this CZO and I apologize for that but I have done quite a few buildings in the Beach Borough. A number of problems always seem to arise in this district. First of all, let me say that I feel there is only one hotel correctly built in Virginia Beach and that was the old Cavalier. You have to take in account at the Beach Borough that we are dealing with cottagewise, to approve commercial structures. I didn't do it, my grandpappy and his grandpappy did it and we are having to deal with these things. The truth of the matter is, we have tourists who come to Virginia Beach dnd we have a three mile strip of 26 miles of oceanfront to accommodate these tourists. I looked dt the CZO here very quickly and I see there is a section to reduce the density on what was H-2, which I now see is RT-1. The cost of land, since I have been in practice, which is about 14 years, has gone from $8000 a linear fOOt dlong the oceanfront to where some of the properties are $18000 a linear foot now. That is causing the cost of units to be in d range right now of about $25,000 a unit. This is causing the costs of our projects to increase. There are probably 10 or 12 sites existing along the oceanfront that could be new facilities constructed. As time goes by, the old faci I ities are becoming inadequate. I think some thought should be given about this reduction in density. Also, I think that the height that you had before, which I think was about 140 feet, is a lot more sensible because the people are coming to Virginia Beach and they want to be on the oceanfront. They want to Public Meeting - CZO March 2, 1988 Page Ten be on the oceanfront. They want to see the ocean. Now it is a problem with design when we have to cope with parking facilities along with the hotel structures. The way we are supposed to back the structure off, it is going to be a real expense when you integrate the tower of parking. It can cost an astronomical cost if you bring your hotel structure down to your parking structure. You are talking a lot less expense. It is a matter of design, not a limitation that we have. I am not saying that we need to increase that. I don't think we do. What we have now is something just at the breaking point. We can deal with that dnd the other architecture can accommodate that with parking and with the density. The thing that I fear is the reduction of new facilities or the upgrading of new facilities. I think some consideration should be looked at the height. The other thing in the RT-2, which is across Atlantic Ave., and this has been something I hdve never understood. We have had 140 feet, I believe on the ocedn side, but across the street we have a 75 foot limitation. Then across Pacific Ave. the C-1 has no limitations. So we have had one ... inaudible ... down to 75 and then unlimited. I think the height limitation on the west side of Atlantic Avenue should have some limitation, perhaps a different height limitation. I am not proposing that, I just think some study should be Mdde on it. The other height thing in the H-1. I see you have a height limitdtion in that also. I think that height should be predicdted on the size of the property and the lot coverage of that building. In other words, if we are in d pldce where we can talk the developer into leaving more land and concentrating his buildings in one area, I think we can create a lot nicer landscaped area and concentrate the building in one tower or two towers. That is not widespread. I think that could dlso apply to the apartment zoning DISO, to concentrate the buildings in d lesser area and leave the land open. I think Myrtle Beach, South Cdrolina hdS done an excellent job of concentrating their buildings and leaving a lot of open space. Some of the other things in here could be looked dt as fdr as design problems. We architects hate to go before BZA and hate to come before the Council with these individual problems on certain projects. I think if the zoning and planning and building inspectors probably had some more latitude in Mdking decisions within their administrative power, that we could avoid a lot of time spent before the BZA and the Council. Mrs. Oberndorf; Thank you Mr. Grimstead. Ronald D. Morrison: I have been a citizen of Virginia Beach for 18 plus years. I would like to thank you dll for this opportunity to addresstheCityCouncil ontheproposedchangestothelanduseordinances that you are now studying. Several years ago, an English economist by the name of Adam Smith, put forth his concept of "the invisible hand theory". This theory was that by each individual trying to selfishly maximize his economic position at the detriment of all others, the economic position of a society would be maximized. Sometimes, studying through Council meetings and Planning Commission meetings, reminds me of Adam Smith's invisible hand theory. I hdve noticed that planning by Public Meeting - CZO March 2, 1988 Page Eleven the Council and Planning Comission tends to be along political lines with no apparent, and I emphasize no apparent, consideration of the economic consequences of a proposed action by Council. Usually a discussion of economic consequences frOM dction by Council comes up several yedrs later. The discussion of a past Council action is usually in the form of poor planning or lack of planning. The Virginid Beach City Council is now engaged in preparing to adopt extensive land use regulations with no apparent consideration of their economic consequences. In d few yedrs, the future pOlitiCidns and concerned citizens can Stdnd up in d meeting such as this and discuss the poor Pldnning and lack of Pldnning put forth by this Council as it adopts the proposed land use regulations. We all stand here tonight and see what results of past actions by Council have been on the growth of Virginia Beach. It takes no great seer to be a Monday morning quarterback. What is needed is some means by which to predict the likely outcome Of edch decision that Council is called upon to make. What is needed is some means by which to predict the Virginid Beach of tomorrow if Council adopts the proposed land use ordinances that it is now considering. It has been my observation that most successful businesses try to anticipate the likely economic results of their decisions before they implement those decisions. If this type Of Pldnning is good for the business community, why would it not be good for Virginia Beach. Doesn't good planning for the future of Virginid Bedch need to consider the economic consequences of Council's actions on the future of its citizens? I have not heard any type of presentation from the staff or the Planning Commission as to the economic consequences of the proposed changes in the land use regulations that Council is now considering. Is the Council not concerned with the economic future of Virginia Beach? I personally think that Council is concerned with the economic future of Virginia Beach. I dlso think that Council has 11 different ideds as to the best manner by which to insure the improved quality of life for the citizens of Virginia Beach in the future. This, in my opinion, is the Adam Smith invisible hand theory of planning. It is a type of planning that everyone in this room tonight has criticized as a lack of planning or no planning by the PdSt Council. What is needed is for this Council to require staff to prepdre d cost benefit analysis of the proposed changes in ldnd use regulations in the City of Virginia Beach prior to the adoption of these changes by Council. Council needs to know if the proposed changes will bring dbout the desired results before they are adopted and at what cost to the citizens of Virginia Bedch. In my opinion, this is the only procedure by which Council can effectively Pldn for the future of Virginia Beach. It is the only means by which to eliminate invisible hand type of planning. Thank you. Mrs. Oberndorf: Are there dny questions of Mr. Morrison? If not, thank you Mr. Morrison. Mr. Morrison, were you representing any group or just yourself? Mr. Morrison: Just myself. Public Meeting - CZO March 2, 1988 Page Twelve Larry Von Nostrdnd: I come to you as a concerned and frustrated citizen home owner of the Borough of Virginia Beach, a life long citizen, having sat in this particular auditorium many times for activities at Virginia Beach High School . I have seen this City go through a tremendous amount of change. Some of it I dM proud of. The new proposals for the land use in the old Beach district are very puzzling and concerning for those of us who live in this part of Virginia Beach. The inconsistency in the placement of R-1 through R-4 zoning in the area is something that most of us are having a difficult time understanding. We know we have made great strides here at the Beach in improving things. I think that the efforts to upgrade the oceanfront and Atlantic Avenue and the beautification project are certainly to be commended. However, we have to be very careful when we propose how property is to be used. The shady beaches after 3 p.m. at the oceanfront are something that we can't chdnge. The frittering away of public land access at water resources here at Rudee Inlet that once were public properties and could have been developed but never were and are not all private domain. That is very frustrating to those of us who have been here for d number of years as well. The spot strip zoning corridors and waivers that have been dllowed to happen here at the Beach are something that we now have to live with. However, what could we do as far as looking at our current proposals? I am a little concerned that within one block of where we sit tonight, if the current proposals were to happen, we could see private clubs, lodges, personal service establishments, businesses where products could be actually manufactured on the premises. Night clubs, bars, taverns, dance halls, funeral homes, eating and drinking establishments and commercial recredtion facilities, other than those of an outdoor nature. That concerns me as a citizen, as a teacher in the City of Virginia BedCh public schools for the past 16 years. All of that concerns me. I have something I would like to share with you and that is, I invite all the members of Council, and especially you Mr. Fentress, as a representative of the Beach Borough, to take a ride through old Virginia Beach in the next few ddYS dnd take with you a copy of this particular proposal and the map with all the zoning specifications that are there dnd look at each and every lot. There is such unique character of nature of Virginia Beach Borough that is no place else in this City. This is not tract housing. This is Virginia Beach as it was many y6ars ago and is still something that we can maintain dS d very special dnd vibrant Pdrt of our City. You go out and look and see where the R-2 and R-3 and R-4 zonings are. They are right across the street from each other or right next door to each other. A specific example of my property is it is proposed to be R-3. Right in front of me, across the street in the middle of the block, it is R-4. Right across the alley in back of me is R-4, completely surrounding R-3. It makes no sense whatsoever. This report is too objective. There is no subjectivity and no street by street and look by look vision of what Virginia Beach Borough is all about. Go out there and ride and see what these numbers mean and see if you think this Pdrticular proposed use of the property in the residentidl sections of Virginia Bedch Borough dre fair and equitable. Thank you very much. Public Meeting - CZO March 2, 1988 Page Thirteen Mrs. Oberndorf: Thank you, are there any questions? Mrs. Henley? Mrs. Henley: You are speaking to what the Planning Commissio-n proposed. Have you seen the change as the Council's review subcomittee has proposed it? Perhaps if Mr. Scott could discuss the manner in which the conversion would be made or is at least now proposed and we can see if that clears up some of the concerns. Mr. Scott: I will take a minute and see if I can perhaps clarify it. First of all, the material that was presented to the Planning Comission was modified considerably by the Planning Commissionbeforewerecommended approval of it because we felt the effect in many cases would be to perhaps inadvertently downzone a large segment of the Beach Borough dnd deprive property owners of the rights that they now enjoy. Planning Commission tried very hard to avoid doing that. They conceded that pdrt. The City Council's review subcoffnittee in looking at it, I am not so sure found dny problems in that part but saw that the proposal as recommended by Planning Commission, perhaps inadvertently resulted in considerable upzoning of other parcels of property. The version that the subcommittee has pushed forward for consideration is another version which does a couple of things. First of all, it has only three districts assOCidted with it instead of four. So the RT-4 District that was proposed is set aside entirely. The property that had previously been covered by that is suggested under this approach to stdy like it is. In another area, it saw that there was probably more land considered for RT-3 thdn was appropriate given the fact thdt, in many cases, it would result in a great increase in property rights. Not that an increase is necessarily bad, but it resulted in incompatible land uses in certain parts of the Beach Borough. I think that the viewpoint (tapes were changed and some dialogue was lost) does require a block by block examination that those who seek to draw neat lines down certain streets in the Beach Borough hdve failed because there isn't that much neatness in the land use title. Exactly how far back resort areas extend, exactly how far back residentidl areds extend literally varies from block to block. There must be a setting aside of the street and neat approach and a more careful observdtion of characteristics ... inaudible...I do feel that the advantage of what is intended, that the version put forth by the City Council's review subcomittee is, I think, made of ... inaudible... direction. Thdt approach really has not been discussed publicly before, except at the vdrious Council workshops held at City Hdll. The comments that I make to you tonight are pretty much the same comments that were made to the Council at the workshops. I think that in many cases, this second version is going to hold the zoning that is already on the ground without any change. Where there is a consideration given to those new districts, it would be only in those cases where approval of zoning alreddy exists up there in that partiCUldr part of the property. Also there would be an absolute minimdl, if not a complete, absence of conversion of ... inaudible ... I think that with that rule of thumb to Public Meeting - CZO March 2, 1988 Page Fourteen follow, a good deal of what was expressed by the past speaker would be eliminated. It is going to require a close examination... inaudible... That is probably the better way... inaudible... Mrs. Oberndorf: Thank you very much. This portion of the map that is standing against the microphone is here for those of you who would want to talk to Mr. Scott after the meeting. Larry Van Nostrand: I have one other question. In a visit to the Planning Office a couple of days ago to take a look at the maps that were proposed, we foresaw what their plan was. When will this be made public? So far it has been discussed in private? Mrs. Oberndorf: No sir, it hdsn't been discussed in private. Mr. Van Nostrand: I mean in your workshops but not released to the public. Mrs. Oberndorf: Wait, first of all, the public has the right to attend the workshops. The press were informed each time the subcommittee met. So it was not, just to erase any suspicion that anything was done that was untoward, it wasn't. There waS dn attempt to have the public and the press involved every step of the way. This map is public and it will be on display and I didn't redlize that it had not been shown to you during this process when it was being discussed with the Council. Mr. Van Nostrand: Two days ago we received information and the maps of the old proposals. This information on this map has not been made public, at least at the Planning Department it was not two days ago. Mrs. Oberndorf: Mr. Scott, would you like to reply to that? Mr. Scott: First of all, when the public comes to our office, we do have an obligation to explain to them what was recomended by the Planning Commission. That is certainly appropriate. I think that at this point, due to the first workshop held with the diverse purpose of making this information available to the public, would certainly be considered information that is to be reviewed by everyone that is affected by it. We will be happy to discuss it with whoever is interested. Mrs. Oberndorf: Could you, in fact, please make available, these proposed maps also so that when the people who are affected in the old Beach Borough will hdve the opportunity to compare the recommenddtions made by the Planning Commission as well as the HMP committee as well as any other recommendations thdt might come out in the public hearings. Mr. Scott: Sure. We will be glad to assist them with whatever we have. We dlso don't want to withhold any information. Mrs. Oberndorf: I don't think anyone would insinuate that. Thank you Public Meeting - CZO March 2, 1988 Page Fifteen very much for your cooperation. Next speaker. Anne J. Henry: I, too, called at the Planning Comission attempting to find out what other proposals had been made and I wasn't successful. So all I can speak to is what I have seen thdt was on the original recommenddtion. Since this was the Council committee and there are d few other people here tonight, I assume who are not on the comittee, I still would like to address some of my concerns. I would like to sdY that I am certainly supportive of the fact that maybe we now will not hdve postage stdmp lots completely filled with houses and to make them even larger, thdt is tremendous. Incidentally, some one referred to people living in large houses on large lots, I do not. I have been a resident of what is now the Virginia Beach Borough since 1939. So I am sort of fdmiliar with the ups and downs about it. I totally agreed with doing away with that RT-4 designation and I really don't think the resort area, the RT designations should extend more than about half way westward in the 300 block. I do think that the entire area of 22nd Street northward to approximately 28th Street should remain residential. I know what the Planning Commission is attempting to do because I hdve read that section of the book rather thoroughly. They were attempting to buffer the residential area. But by moving the RT designations so far back, there isn't much residential area left. They sort of threw the baby out with the bath water on that one. So, for goodness sakes, do try to hold that RT designdtion well to the east of Arctic Avenue, street by street, as Mr. Van Nostrand suggested, block by block iS d good way to gO dbout it. We even, on my street, 27th, we even have a wrap around. If we do away with RT-4, I happen to end up with d residential designation but, from the ridiculous to the absurd, right across the street from me was an RT-4 and just on the other side a little jigger of land was RT-3. We really have a potpourri there. So I totally concur with a lot by lot, block by block look. If I can be of any help, I will be glad to. The days are getting longer nOW dnd we can get out a little bit after we get home from work. Thank you. Mrs. Oberndorf: Thank you, Mrs. Henry. Are there any questions from the member of the Council? Next speaker. Betty Lou Connell: I have lived on 23rd Street since 1936. I don't want to repeat anything that the other speakers, Mr. Vdn Nostrand and Mrs. Henry, have already gone over. However, I would like to urge a little more input from the workshop which I was not aware of until I accidentally stumbled on this at the Planning Commission. I was not dWdre any of this, the ordindnce. I called down there twice to try to get a book. I wasn't able to get one. And like Mr. Van Nostrand, I got the old map and really didn't know what was going on. I would like to see some type of input from the area people. Maybe some type of notice that could be put in our tax bills, for instance. Since this Stdrted in September we have hdd to pdy our taxes and if we had some type of notice or something, I have been looking for this ever since I found OUt dbout it by accident. I found one thing in the pdper and when I Public Meeting - CZO Mdrch 2, 1988 Page Sixteen went to the Council meeting not too long dgO, there was an entry on the back of the agenda. Since then, I hdve heard it on the radio one time. For a major change like this, I think that our area representative, Mr. Fentress, anybody on the Council or in the tax bills or something, the citizens who actually live down there could have some input on it. We would like to stay in that area. We don't need a larger honky-tonk area right now. I think I have lived there long enough to say that I have seen quite a few changes. I would like to see us be able to contribute more. If there are any questions, I will be glad to help. Mrs. Oberndorf: Thank you Mrs. Connell for your testimony and I am sure Mr. Watts and the rest of the Council will have made a note of your request for a complete workshop for the Beach Borough residents. Roger Newill: Fourteen years ago, when the re2Oning was done, Bob Scott and Aubrey Watts and I were the only people in the room working for the City. I was insisting that they wait for another chance so I could go out and strike out on another career. I am representing the Resort Area Advisory Commission. We are extremely pleased at the tremendous coming together of a mechanism for everybody to coordinate projects at the ocednfront, through a gredt deal of private investment and commitment and a great deal of public investment and commitment, both spent and committed to the future, in both mental and dollar comittment. We have made some suggested modifications to the ordinance, the ones on the table nOW dnd the ones that were availdble previously. There are three main goals. One is to allow convention oriented hotels which I think, by anyone's definition, means larger hotels with more banquet facilities, much more food service capabilities and probdbly some more retail to allow those..inaudible...or zoning through historic accident is very much keyed to smaller lots and smaller buildings. The second strong direction in our change is to allow choices toward parking, to allow people to handle their parking in ways other than building garages on Atlantic Avenue. It is extremely important that we start to create halfways for other things to happen there. The third is to create mechanism for open space to occur. Everyone wants it in one form or the other, for one purpose of dnother. It is very difficult to find, where you put it, how you pay for it. It is not at all hard to imagine how you use it. The modifications we have suggested, one or two of them would also start to provide mechanisms to finance the cost of parking change in an open space. I think that is a very important thing we can do to cut down on the cost that we are facing in the future. It is very important. Bob Scott, I think, is fully aware of several drafts and changes. Many of you folks on the Council are very aware of them. We would encourage you to consider their implementation at this time. We think that the movement that is happening with the seawall, the beautification of Atlantic Avenue and the boardwalk will very likely prompt a greater speed of private sector interest in activity. It is importdnt that our zoning be in place for that and allow that kind of thing to happen gracefully. Public Meeting - CZO March 2, 1988 Pdge Seventeen R. J. Nutter: I am an attorney and I live at 1613 Cutty Sark Road in Virginia Beach. I am here tonight to really urge the Council to consider proposals that I believe currently exist. They will go a long way in promoting and encouraging convention hotels in the resort area. I think it is important that we recognize that the Economic Development Department has at least for the pdst five years, been telling us that we are in critical need of convention high quality hotel type of development in this drea. There hdve been a number of changes, however, in the market that have left us in a position where we are economically unable to compete, given our present zoning laws. There have also been chdnges in the market such that I now understand that 60% of the vacations thdt people take are no longer in the summer months like they used to be, but in fact, during the months of September and May. That complete shift in the market has pushed the convention market to more importance in Virginia Beach and the history of the resort area. We need, I think, something to encourdge the multi-million dollar investment that is necessitated by a convention hotel. I think you know you are in trouble when McDondlds multi-national corporation with millions of dollars in advertising boards up their own facilities in the resort area for 6 months out of the year. Something has to be done to encourage both development in that dred and the quality thdt Virginia Beach wants to attrdCt conventions and to lengthen the period of economic viability of the Beach Borough. Both of these things legally can be accomplished. I am here tonight to say that there is support in progress for 4 convention hotels, provided the problems thdt exist in the current zoning ordinance can be resolved to allow them to occur. They are relatively minor in nature and I think your staff has done a great job in recognizing it. We would only ask that you consider some of the drafts that your staff presently has. I would be happy to answer any questions if you have them. Mrs. Oberndorf: Thank you, Mr. Nutter. Mr. Moss. John Moss: ...inaudible...cost per linear foot was $18,000. I guess that was for the resort itself. Given that, first of all, the property is encumbered with... inaudible...the land itself, what would have to be the market incentives within the height restriction to prevent the ... inaudible...torequiremorethanonehotel ... inaudible...substantial modification, why the parking and still make money. It is a variety of things... inaudible ... with height which a lot of it can be adjusted relatively on a minor basis to accommodate that while still following the ULI approach, sun shading the beach on a step of that type. In fact, it is ironical when you sit down and take d look at the ordinance, how relatively minor many of the changes need to be to be effective. There are problems involved, I don't want to minimize them but I can tell you that staff presently has proposals in from of them that really they seem satisfied with, that will address these proposals but the economic costs are substantial and there are still, fortundtely, some properties in the area that would not necessitate the destruction of, wholesale destruction, of the existing facilities. Public Meeting - CZO March 4, 1988 Page Eighteen Mrs. Oberndorf: Thank you. While we are getting ready to call the next speaker, I would like to point out that Mrs. McClannan was in the back and I didn't see her until just now. She was listening to you folks from the back of the room. Mr. Heischober sent a messdge through our City Clerk that he Wds on his way home from Richmond at 5:30 and he would be unable to get here in time. Next speaker. Bob Briner: I reside at 1240 Thomas Bishop Lane. I am a retired Navy Captdin. I have been in the real estate business for 9 years as a agent and associate broker. I come here really as a neophyte, having tried to digest the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. I am a member of the MuniCipdl Affairs Committee of the Tidewater Board of Realtors, out of guilt. I have not been a member Of dny of those committees in the 9 years I have been in the business and I feel like I should be here inputing into the organization. I am here tonight to observe, but I felt impelled to speak aS d private citizen. So I speak for no interest group at all. I speak from the experience of banging around town for 9 years and seeing a lot of good and positive things happen. I think some bad things have happened. I commend you for the time that you have put into your job, at a modest fee. I have difficulty understanding how we can take the City in the right direction with 11 different people with good intentions, in the right direction to have a beautiful and prosperous town in 10 or 20 years down the road. A harmonious and intelligent...inaudible...the Comprehensive Land Use Plan, etc. I hear different interest groups speak where the builders dre coming from, the need for the 5,000 square foot lots, the high rollers in town need the bigger lots to the extent of 10,000 square feet, etc. Let me just make some coments here. We are talking about building more homes. You go down to Green Run and some of the townhouses, just a cursory look at the compardble houses in the MLS books and hardly one third of the townhouses sell and two thirds are withdrawn or expire. Maybe there is housing that is affordable to people in town. In the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance it tdlks about maintaining what we have and a ten yedr inspection situation. Some of the wood sided houses that have not been preserved or painted or something done to them to maintain them, they are going to be a slumsville, I think. Don't let that happen, like what happened at Chimney Hill, I don't like to think that R. G. Moore hasn't done some good things dround this town as far dS construction goes, but he went into Chimney Hill and built some contemporary houses and sold off lots for some cash flow and then came Flair with some handsome colonidIS. You get salt and peppered construction there with some handsome colonidls dlong side of colonials which looked like a ... inaudible ... It is curious to me that in the building of areas and the planning for it, I went through Pelican Dunes dnd there was one entrance into the Aeries. If there ever was an accident at that circle, for a fire coming out of the Chesapedke Bay and hit one of those first townhouses, 3 stories, dll wood, I think it would wipe out the area. You couldn't get a fire truck in there. Isn't there a check off system where you plan a community where the fire depdrtment or police department or ambulance organization hdS to check it out to make sure it is going Public Meeting - CZO March 2, 1988 Page Nineteen to be satisfactory. It is very curious to me that there is only one entrance at the Aeries where there should be another exodus out through Ba,ylake Pines... inaudible... Rosemont Forest, you go out to Rosemont Forest on Indian River Road and that two lane situation. I threaten to get up at 4:30 some morning and see what happens out there between 6 and 7. It must be a total disaster. I think that planning and looking ahead ten years up the road, Old Donation Parkway, I know there is a lot, that would have been a great thing for this town but I know there were interest groups in the middle of thdt thing that settled that...inaudible...came to town in the last 3 or 4 years and they want to live in Kempsville. We are doing something wrong. You don't want to live down there because it is so crowded. You see Thoroughgood where they put in those houses in front and nice green park in front of it. You see Laurel Cove, dn 800 family unit. They put in... inaudible. ..right up to Great Neck Road. It takes away the aesthetic appeal. The bottom line to me is that I think our thinking should be aligned to what is in the best interest of Virginia Beach. I think all 11 of you have your ideas of that and I don't know how you could come to what is good. I toss this out as a suggestion. In all..inaudible... the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance which you don't hdve half the feel for that a lot of the people in the audience have. For $100,00 or a half a million dollars or a million dolldrs, I would think that it would be worth the money, I don't know where we fit on the budget Stdndpoint, to bring in some out of town expert thdt hdS been a proven track record, not in academid but a guy that was like that, Rouse I guess his name is, who did the same thing in Baltimore and up and down the coast, who has been very successful in developing and as we still continue to develop rapidly, a real expert and then have qualified experts from different areas of our community to work with him and come up with some goal for Virginia Beach that is good for Virginia Beach. I guess that is my only suggestion, would be that we need a goal. It seems like you redd the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and you get all the different kinds of interests groups and I can see all the reasons behind it. It seems like to have a successful situation, I think this railroad from Norfolk to Virginia Beach is an outstanding idea. I don't know what all the rdMifiCations are. I am sure the cost is what is holding it bdck. The beautification of Atlantic Avenue and the beaches ... inaudible... I think some expert with a proven trdck record out there should be hired with input from our organizations on his committee, whoever that would be, would show a really productive situation in the next 10 or 20 years. I hope I made myself clear. Any questions? I see a puzzled look on Balko's face. Mr. Balko: Yes sir, Mr. Briner. Listening to you, I am trying to comprehend everything you are trying to say. As you say experts, I want to tell you we do have many experts on our staff and our City. You may disagree with that but I think we do, as a matter of fact. I am very proud of all the experts in this City. Sometimes, you being in real estate so I think you understand, you have different segments of the population dnd I struggle with this affordability of homes. Today Public Meeting - CZO March 2 1988 Page Twenty we have an organization that is coming into our area that is going to bring about 700 or 800 jobs. The bulk of those are going to be minimum wage. How many houses are you going to sell them? I think we heard here this evening that the average is probably around $90,000. I guess you probably knew that as well as anybody else. Those type of things scare me. You live on Thomas Bishop Lane. Yes, I live in the Great Neck Road area also. We all can't live there. Not that I look down on anybody. I am torn with this same type thing. So, yes, I have a very perplexed look on my face and I am always trying in my mind to solve the problems. I am not angry with you, I am just trying to understdnd completely. Thank you very much. Mr. Briner: I am not angry with anybody either. I just think that if we had a goal or format, it is strange to me that you are concerned with affordability of homes. We are not selling the present inventory because we are not making sure that they are maintained. You go down Kempsville Road between Indian River Road and Centerville Turnpike, that is the saddest bunch of fences I have ever seen. I think the City did a great job of extending Kempsville Road, they could put the fences bdck up, that is gross. I think the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance calls for some kind of control of fencing and also some kind of control after ten years of checking houses. How you can ever legally enforce it, I don't know, but some of these houses in Kempsville with wood siding are getting... inaudible...Bent Tree was one of the best places to live 10 years ago. Nice affordable housing, 5,000 square foot lot, zero lot line, and they are not being maintained. Mr. Bdlko: What you bring up is good and I want to tell you thdt your Council is wrestling with this also. We dre trying to look at homes when purchased, how should they be inspected, whether you can afford it or whether it should be mandatory City inspection to go out there and look at it. I want you to know that we have just as many people saying "no, I don't want that" and we also have just as many people saying "yes, we want it". We are wrestling with that right now because I feel in the next 10 years, just as you do, that we have an aging housing stock out here that has to be maintained. Who knows that better thdn yourself. If you go down the street and try to sell a home and you see somebody's house falling down, do you think you are going to sell the house next door to him? Mr. Briner: No. Mr. Balko: I can appreciate your comments. You have hit on some things that we have in operation. We don't know what the answers are but we are working on them. Mr. Briner: Good luck to you. Thank you for your time. Mrs. Oberndorf: One question, I believe that when City staff does review the safety, police and fire perspective in the entrance and Public Meeting - CZO Mdrch 2, 1988 Page Twenty One exits to the housing developments, less this testimony end with leaving the wrong idea in the minds of any of our homeowners thdt the City is not concerned about the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of each and every neighborhood. Am I correct? Mr. Watts: Yes m'am. Every subdivision that is put to record is reviewed by a representative in the Fire Department and several of the other depdrtments. I have made notes of some of his remarks and I will be checking on them. Mr. Briner: I would request a review of the police, the fire department and the ambulance organization why there is only one entrancd into 240 townhouses that require...inaudible... and you have a wreck around that circle. Mr. Watts: I have made notes on that and I will certainly get back with you. Mrs. Oberndorf: Thank you Mr. Briner. Louise M. White: I live on the southeast corner of 25th and Baltic with my husband and two grown children. I hadn't planned to speak tonight but I am very concerned about this manner. I hate to bring it up now because I don't know if this is what you are considering or if this definitely considered. Can I ask that question or should I just go on dnd sdy what it on my heart? Mrs. Oberndorf: Just go ahead and give us whatever it is. Mrs. White: One of my concerns is that our meeting was not publicized. I dm not trying to cast the blame but I called 5 of my neighbors on my block that are past 60. Each of them have been in their homes for over 30 years. They had not seen that small article in the Beacon. The one neighbor that called right before I left tonight Sdid "you know, I did see it but I don't think it redlly lets us know whdt a great change they are anticipating or what is going on. Would you mention thdt we would like to have a little more publicity." I think that is a reasonable request. I would like for you to make note of that. Also, as far as the Planning Commission having open hearings when they were working on this, I certainly read my paper from cover to cover and I know what you all say at the Council meetings because I really do read my paper. I didn't see anything at all about Mr. Scott holding open hedrings for us to attend. Mrs. Oberndorf: Was it in the paper Mr. Scott? Mrs. White: I would like tO Cdll your office and maybe find out when because I really would have attended those meetings. What I want to say is, we have lived in our house for over 14 years and we have really worked hard dt painting it. I think that, it is not d historicdl Public Meeting - CZO March 4, 1988 Page Twenty Two house, but it was probably the first one on our side of Arctic Avenue. Everyone on our street has flowers and keep their lawns nice. I think they would lose their incentive if behind them was a nightclub or, I think what I really Wdnt to say is please don't let the business district come over into our neighborhood. I hear you all mentioning where you live and you hear this all the time but I think you would be upset if you thought that an automobile repair shop could be behind your house. So I am begging you to consider the residents and I,too, would be hdppy to walk around our neighborhood and introduce you to some of the longstanding residents. Maybe there is not as much tax in residential homes. I keep asking myself when is this going to stop. Yes, there is something keeping the sun off the beach after 3 o'clock in the afternoon. When I hear of the high rise hotels being mentioned, maybe if they were built high enough on the west side of Atlantic Avenue, we would not have dny sun after 11 in the morning. Mr. Nutter, I am going to recommend that you go visit Ocean City, Maryland and look at all of their convention hotels. I hope that this appeal will have some bearing on your decision. Thank you. Mrs. Oberndorf: Thank you Mrs. White. I believe Mrs. Smith has a copy of the newspaper ad that was purchased by the City and size of it that was run in the Beacon. Am I correct? Mrs. Smith: At least five times for this hearing. 'Mrs. Oberndorf: I am sure that if you go back and check the records, the advertisements for the other hearings will be made dvaildble to you. We made note that you all want ffk)re personal notice. Next speaker. Michael J. Barrett: I represent the Runnymede Corporation. I live at 1829 Eden Way, Virginid Beach. Having sat here for about an hour and a half, I can understand why the progrdMS dt the junior high only lasted an hour. I apologize in advance if I seem a bit confused in my comments. We have tried to keep in touch with this process and we, too, are a little surprised about the public hearings. I guess we missed it in the Beacon and I am sorry about that. We did, when we read of it this morning in the Beacon, we tried to do some additional homework and it was then that I learned about the HMP committee. I have never heard of a HMP committee. I can only assume that it is an acronym for the members of the committee. Mrs. Oberndorf: It stands for Henley, Planning and Parker. You can't tell the difference between P's and O's. Mr. Barrett: I finally caught on to that after a while. I got the report this morning. I went to the Planning Department and picked it up from Bob's staff and attempted to read it and digest it during the ddy. I guess I can understand how you feel when you get a 200 page agenda and it is supposed to be ready for the next day Council meeting. I hope you will take thdt into account when I make my comments. Obviously Public Meeting - CZO March 2, 1988 Page Twenty three I put them together fairly quickly. I can't begin to coment on the overdll report but I would like to comment on a few items. First of all, we do support the recomendation of the Planning Commission in the establishment of the RT-3 Resort Tourist District. In particular, we support the multi-family development in the proposed RT-3 District. I Cdn't see any reason why it would be required only as part of a multi- use project. In pdrticular, we approved of the incentives in the RT-3 District for desire of design features. We thought that was a particular good idea. Secondly, we support the recommendation of the Planning Commission in the establishment of the RT-4 Resort Tourist District. This district allows special resort/tourist uses which you have heard other people speak about tonight. Again, in particular, we approve of the incentives for the desire of design features. We think that is a very good way to turn this about. Thirdly, in reviewing the parking in multi-family dwellings, we support the recommendation of the Planning Commission which would require 2 spaces per dwelling unit for the first 25 units in the complex and then only 1 and 3/4 for all additional units in excess of 25. We believe that unused parking is both costly, wasteful and certainly reduces greenspace and planters which we think should be included in a parking lot. Fourthly, we recomend that you support the Planning Commission and not require child care centers to obtain a conditional use permit in the proposed 8-1 District. B-1 is a business category and the use is compatible with business and therefore we don't see any real need to propose a special requirement to get d conditional use permit in the B-1 category. We certainly approve of your recomendations in the residentidl areas. On a personal note, unrelated to my position with Runnymede, I have listened to the comments from Pdrties to reduce lot sizes and believe that it redlly does have significant economic impact. Before you take any action, some sort of physical impact statement should be done to really assert the impact of this particular change. I happen to believe that everything should be done possible to encourage home ownership beCdUse that is the dream, obviously, of most Americans. I think that most people who live in Virginia Beach, I would contend that it is the people that buy the starter homes, that eventually buy homes in Great Neck and Little Neck because of their wide investment. I know that it is a very difficult issue for you to struggle with. But I would point out that we keep those opportunities for the first time buyer to buY d home in Virginia Beach and not have to either look at multi-family housing or residences in another city. I am afraid we might not get those people back when it comes time for them to buy the more exoensive dwelling. In summary, I certainly appreciate the opportunity to participate in this process. We certainly would request that you consider our comments. We know it is edSY to do the popular thing and it is really hard sometimes for you to determine what is the right thing to do. Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak to you tonight. Mrs. Oberndorf: Thank you Mr. Barrett. Mr. Moss has a question. Mr. Moss: Mr. Barrett, in regard to your comments of the daycare Public Meeting - CZO March 2, 1988 Page Twenty four centers, your primary use in a 8-1, I ask you to turn your attention to page 103 of the document. The minimum lot size in 8-1 is 5,000 square feet. I don't know about many people, but I am not sure what kind of daycare could comply with 5,000 squarefeet. Counci 1. . . inaudible... toward the recredtiondl as well as the sedentary requirements for a daycare center that we dre trying to make daycare a conditional use. Unfortunately, you Cdn't leave the marketplace to take care of children because that doesn't do the job very well. I t h i n k :,, indudible...compatible but when you go to the minimum lot size to go in B-1, they may be incompatible with the requirements of daycare. I don't think you would want to send your children to a 5,000 square foot daycare center. Mr. Barrett: I certainly understand that, Mr. Moss. The only consideration from my standpoint WdS that there are certain reguldtions that the State Department of Social Services applies to the licensing. We feel it does it very adequately to take Cdre of the situation and therefore it does not need to be dealt with through zoning. That is my only corffnent. Thank you very much. Mrs. Oberndorf: Thank you Mr. Barrett. Next speaker. George Tdylor, Jr.: I hope you can understand me. I have to say something about the Council. I know you are industrious, the men are handsome and the ladies are pretty.... inaudible...and people might not think otherwise. But actually I don't hdve too much to say right now because I before Mr. Joe Hood of North Virginia Beach said it very very well indeed. There are several things I would like to SdY. One is the gentleman from Tidewater Builders ...inaudible... about 5,000 square foot lots. I heard a lady say something about postage stamp lots. But regardless of what kind of lot you have, where they are, you have got to get people from here to there. I hdven't hedrd anyone ask anything about transportation, which seems to be now one of the most urgent needs that we have in the City of Virginid Beach. I thank you very much. Mrs. Oberndorf: Thank you Mr. Taylor. R. D. Marco: This is the first time I have ever had the chance to speak in public. Ladies dnd gentlemen of City Council, Aubrey Watts, I don't think I have met you but I have seen you before. Mr. Moss, Mr. Balko, Bob Fentress, we danced 20 years ago I believe at a place, Barbara Henley, my sweetheart. I think everything has been said that is supposed to be Sdid here tonight. I am in favor of one thing alone. I have lived at the beach since 1949 and I like where I live and I want it to be left alone. I am sdying "leave the zoning in the part of the beach thdt I live in as it is". I appreciate it. Thank you very much. Mr. Oberndorf: We have 3 people dsking something dt the same time. Mr. Marco, were you answering someone, I am sorry. Mr. Balko has a question. Public Meeting - CZO March 2, 1988 Page Twenty five Mr. Balko: Mr. Marco, where do you live? Mr. Marco: 319 Twenty Second Street. I live on the Expressway. It was jammed down my throat in spite of my opposition. I don't want to say any more. Mr. Fentress: I would like to make a comment to you and all the residents of the beach who have spoken tonight. I will have one of the latest mapS dvailable in my office so during the day you can see where your property is. The map there is up-to-date at this point. Mr. Scott: This is the map that we discussed at City Council day before yesterday. Mr. Fentress: It is next to the latest thing we have in our discussions but it will be available or one like that will be available for anybody to look dt and to give me their input on any PdrtiCUldr lot and location. My office is at 35th and Pacific Avenue, Commerce Bdnk. Mrs. Oberndorf: Mr. Marco, we are sorry we are not all your sweethearts but we will work on it. Next speaker. Jan Kitchin: I live at 315 26th Street dnd have lived in the old Beach Borough for approximately a quarter of a century. First of all, in regards to things that have been done in the resort area, I took a walk down to the oceanfront day before yesterday and it really does look more beautiful. It is encouraging to see those kinds of chdnges. I have a great many questions and they deal primarily with the future. It is very difficult for the citizens of the community to react to inforMdtion they don't know dbout. I would like to some suggestion on how to be effective coMMuniCdtors with each other. I think that the lack of people in the audience tonight might indicate apathy, it indicates that a lot of people simply did not know about it. First of all, I would like to say that you have very creative people on the City Council and Planning Commission and I know you have some wonderful artists. How about we jazz up the notice of public hearings where it can look something like the Mental Health Crisis Line. Everybody can see that. I missed four of these and I look at the newspaper every day in the library. I only found one, which was Sunday, which did not give me enough time to alert all of our Civic League in the old beach, which numbers about 400 people. There was simply not enough time. We also would appreciate being included in some of the input in the old beach ared. Six years ago Nancy Parker, Mike ?, and myself had a meeting with Mr. Scott, whO dssured us that we would be contacted when the CZO changes would be considered. We were never contacted. Nancy was contacted by virtue of being on Planning Comission and City Council but I don't think that would have happened unless she had been serving in that capacity. We feel rather neglected. I think the idea of a notice in our tdx bill is wonderful. We would all like to have notices of any zoning changes that would affect all of us, just a simple little Public Meeting - CZO March 2, 1988 Page Twenty Six newsprint flyer would be appreciated. I think I can speak for the members of our civic league, having worked with them for about 15 years, in saying that the residents of this community, based on what we see and where we live and what we notice, and many of us are involved in business. We are not just residents, we are integrdted in the business and economic community. We would very much like to see the downtown area, if you will, the area of the Bedch going from Rudee Inlet to approximately 42nd Street developed into the coffnittee into which the higher density rental housing, which iS dppealing to primarily a transient community discouraged in fdvor of lower density homes, condominiums and townhouse, year round residents who would support this center that is alreddy here. We have many shops sitting vacant. I noticed some for rent signs on some beautiful shops on Laskin Road the other day. To be putting in more businesses and more soft commercial, that are going to possibly fold because there are not enough people to support them doesn't make sense to me. If we could develop this area intO d more beautiful combination residential resort appealing to conferences and beautify the downtown, but encourdge year round residents. We have lived without curbs and guttering for years. We have gotten some pavement in our alleys, which we appreciate. I think this is the kind of development that the whole downtown would benefit from. If you hdve ever visited Naples or Ft. Myers Beach, Florida, or Ocean City, N.J., they have integrated a beautiful section of the resort section quite successfully. I think this is the direction we need to go in. I think the Resort Area Advisory Commission should have some representdtives from the different constituencies of this area. We are a very favorable community, in terms of the residents that live there who have generally been there a long time. We could have representatives of the civic league, all Beach civic leagues from Shadowlawn and any other groups. I think these people have been slightly, quite frdnkly. Business people should be involved, small business owners should also be involved in some decision making. I also have a problem with whdt appears to be a push to get this through before the election. I don't think that enough input has been gotten by the community before the changes come into effect. Thank you. Mrs. Oberndorf: Thdnk you very much Mrs. Kitchin. You have made some very cogent recommendations and I am sure everyone up here have had an opportunity to write them down. The one I like best is jazzing up the public notices. Jan Kitchin: Would it be possible to get published in the Beacon, the maps so we could see whdt the changes are as they are proposed. We never see them unless we get them from the opposites. My whole community is up in arms by the number of people who have gone down to the Planning Commission and got the maps and then they weren't ... inaudible ... and didn't know this new map had been signed. Lou Pace: I like what you said. I think it was very appropriate. I agree with you 100%. I live in Hunt Club Forest and I am here to Public Meeting - CZO March 2, 1988 Page Twenty seven represent myself. I have been making some notes and some observations I had made at the Planning Commission when they first had there hearing on it. One was fencing. Fencing has been a problem throughout the City. Nobody knows what they can do or can't do. I think that the present ordinance on fencing, which isn't really enforced, but then it is enforced when it is not supposed to be enforced. There should be some real valid guidelines so people will know what they can and can't do, including the fence company. There have been people who have put up fences and had the fence company put it up and then they found it was in the wrong place. I think you should have d building permit for fences so that we would know what you can or can't do. That is the first thing. Another thing in regard to fences, also, it is in regard to townhouses and main streets, beauty of the City as Pat Bridges mentioned. I can't understand why anybody would put the back of a house up to a street and let them fence in the backyard dnd block off everything. Now you have d tunnel effect with fences running down both sides of the street. I think what you should do is have the front of the house face the street. Down in Texas, what they do is, they have dt the end of the block, you come in there and you come into an dlley. You have your parking, your backyard, barbecue and everything behind the house. The front of the house has no driveway. Nobody puts up a fence. They put up shrubs. It is pretty, it looks good, and that is the way it ought to be, in my opinion. Billboards is something I have addressed to this Council many times land you have basically, supposedly eliminated. I look in that at billboards, and I think that is on page 44. The thing about this, you are going to have another hearing on it. I think it would only proper to have a bunch of these for the people who come. It is ridiculous not to have the piece of paper YOU dre going to be talking about availdble when YOU dre having a hearing. I don't know how much it cost the City but I don't understand why they weren't here for everybody in the room. You see billboards in places where they shouldn't be and yet I believe most of this on page 44 is geared to ... indudible... billboards bUt dlSO the original ordinance which said you weren't supposed to have them either, okay? It says "no billboard should be closer than 50 feet to any property line or located closer than 600 feet to a right-Of-WdY. Well, I have seen a awful lot of billboards closer than 50 feet to a property line. There was something else I saw in here. No billboards should be located on any lot having a frontage of less than 200 feet. What I don't understand is how the billboard continues being there when, like Virginia Beach Boulevard is being developed and there are still billboards up and down Virginia Beach Boulevard. I don't know why they are still there even under the old ordinance. I think we should look into that and do something about it. I want to go to page 77. That is the dimensional requirements for lots. It shows minimum lot area in square feet dnd it starts from a R- 40 zoning to an R-5S. You are showing a 5,000, 5,000, 5,000, 6,500. It has not been actually changed. Its 7500 by consent of the Council dnd vote by the Council. It has not been changed. We are still looking at 5,000 square foot lots. I will support the 10,000 square foot lot. I will tell you why, because it makes the City prettier for one thing. Public Meeting - CZO March 2, 1988 Page Twenty Eight A lot of people moved out of Norfolk where they had those small 5,000 square foot lots because they could get big lots out at Virginia Beach. Now they want to go back down to 5,000 square foot lots. Do they want to move back to Norfolk? I think we ought to stay with the 10,000 foot lots. If someone can't afford those, we will subsidize them so they will hdve a bigger house and bigger lot. I can't understand why we ever have a rezoning thdt is going to put another curb cut on a road that doesn't have an acceleration or decelerdtion ldne. In other words, why should somebody develop property and put more traffic on d street that is going to interfere with traffic thdt is already on that street without providing lefthand turn lanes and/or right turn lanes so they can get on and off the street sdfely? It is a dangerous situation to put more trdffic on the street without providing turn lanes. I think that should be part of any rezoning, I don't care if it is a new subdivision, shopping center or what have you. I saw a place up on Gredt Neck Road that had, what they did was, they took the curb cut coming in and they put an angle cut coming that way and an angle cut coming this way so that you weren't having to stop to turn right but would actually come kind of down on an angle into the shopping center and you come on dn angle coming out, too. I think that should be mandatory. A lot of zoning that you have down there have the same thing as, you hdve got to do this as, let's say you put in a daycare center. You have got to hdve low lighting, you have to hdve this kind of fence, you have to have this and that. Why isn't it standard? Why isn't that the criteria for putting a daycare center on B-1, B-2, Ag zoning? That is the criteria everybody wants but it is not mandatory. If you guys don't remember to make sure it is part of it, then it won't hdPpen. I think those type of things should be mandatory. Townhouses- I can't gO dlong with 6. If you are going to have townhouses, I think the maximum should be 4. I can't believe that in 1987, people built townhouses with parking in front. Here again, let's hdve the yard in front, parking behind. I was over on Warwick Boulevard and there was a row of townhouses on Warwick Boulevard that had been there, I know, for 60 years and they looked nice. They had no parking in front. Here we are building in 1987 and I don't think they look nice. We have got to do something about that. Taxes--if YOU dre going to take an agricultural zoning that has a value of, say, $10,000 an acre. You are going to make it a commercial zoning, I-2 or B-2 or something. I think that taxes on that property should reflect that zoning to the effect that if they don't do what they plan on doing within a short period of time, it is going to revert back to what it was origindlly so they will want to get back to the lower taxes. I don't know why, if they are going to get an industrial zoning, they are not paying the higher taxes on it. It Is more valuable property and they ought to be paying the taxes on it. I think that the thing that everybody is concerned about with dny rezoning iS Vdlue. The value of their own property dnd the value of neighbors property in the future. I have lived in this City for almost 8 years. Twice I have had things happen next door to me and across the street that have affected the value of my home. For example, where I live right now, across the street, they are building on 5,000 square Public Meeting - CZO March 2, 1988 Page Twenty Nine foot lots. I am on a 10,000 square foot lot. They are building $70,000 single family homes. They have even started to build some thdt don't have gdrages. Yet I sit there and hdve to take it. I can't dO d thing about it. It is difficult to show that I lost value because my house did go up in the last six years. But it has stopped. It is not going up any more. Thdt is not fair to the existing citizens. I think thdt is the criteria we have to look at towards zoning. We have to look at the value of the people who are living there. What dre we doing to them? What is their property value? Whdt effect does it have on them? It constantly happens in this City where somebody is affected by what is done down there. It just doesn't seem to be the important criteria that I think it should be. So those are some thoughts of mine. I don't know how yoU can build another house until you get the water problem solved. I will let you worry about that later. Any questions? Mrs. Oberndorf: Thank you very much Mr. Pace. Patty Masterson: I live at 103 68th Street at the North End of the beach. I would like to speak in support of your R-5 zoning, particularly in respect to the 40% footprint. The 40% footprint will reduce the value of my property. There is no question about that. It is where I have lived for 38 years. This is where I have worked to acquire my retirement equity. What is more important, I agree with Pat Bridges, that beauty if what we dre after. I have fought for years to prevent the erosion of the quality of life at the North End. I live in the shadow of the Ramada. I live across the street from a 10 x 30 x 35 foot monstrosity that the Planning Commission approved. What we need to do, I would recommend is that we go to the 40% and also stick with the requirements, not grant not so many hardship variations from the existing requirements. The 30 foot will not produce beauty. It will produce 30 foot ...inaudible...Let's stay where you are. Thank you very much for permitting us to be here. Mrs. Oberndorf: Thank you. Is there anyone present who did not sign up to speak but wishes to have the opportunity to speak? Would you please state your name? Larry Bloom: I live at the North End of Virginid Beach. I would just like to echo what our last speaker said. Please leave the North End as it is. I heard the civic league spedk dnd I can only say that the civic league, I speak for all of the people who live in the North End of Virginid Beach, and it will definitely be an economic impact if any changes are made to reduce the density of the lot coverage. We plead with you to leave it thdt way. We also were not aware of any changes. The last thing that we heard was that the Planning Commission recommended that this StdY dS it WdS. Thank you. Mrs. Oberndorf: Thank you Mr. Bloom. I would like to thank all those who attended the meeting this evening. We had 21 speakers. I think some very important points were made here this evening. It has betome Public Meeting - CZO March 2, 1988 Page Thirty apparent thdt such a workshop needs to be held for the folks that live in the old Beach Borough to have the opportunity to review the proposals. I think, through education, we will begin to communicate on a more meaningful level. For the North Bedch Civic League and for those who don't agree with the position they have taken, we will be looking at that closely. There will be another hearing held March 10 at 7 p.m. in the Kempsville High School cafeteria or duditorium. I would like to thank the staff and each one of you who took the time out of your precious schedule to come and visit with us. I would like to say on behalf of the Council that this body has not tdken lightly the responsibility of looking at the long range growth of the City and the zoning laws that will control that. We look forward to having your input and your participation in the future. Thank you very much for attending.