3. Hours of operation shall be 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.

Transcription

1 Item #1 Ebony Pittman Conditional Use Permit 2552 Margaret Drive District 7 Princess Anne February 12, 2014 CONSENT An application of Ebony Pittman for a Conditional Use Permit (Family Child Day-Care) on property located at 2252 Margaret Drive, District 7, Princess Anne. GPIN: CONDITIONS 1. The in-home Family (Child) Daycare shall be limited to a maximum of twelve (12) children, other than children living in the home, and the permitted number of children based on their ages shall be set forth by the Virginia Department of Social Services. 2. No more than one (1) person, other than the applicant and immediate family, shall assist with the operation of the Family Daycare Home at any one time. 3. Hours of operation shall be 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. 4. The applicant shall stagger the arrival and departure times for the children such that vehicular congestion is avoided. 5. When the daycare is not open for business, all play equipment associated with the daycare shall be located behind the front façade of the house. 6. A non-illuminated sign not more than one square foot in area, identifying the daycare may be mounted flat against the house. 7. The applicant shall be licensed with the Commonwealth of Virginia for this use. Failure to maintain said license in good standing shall result in revocation of this Conditional Use Permit. 8. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits and inspections from the Planning Department/ Permits and Inspections Division. The applicant shall secure a Certificate of Occupancy from the Building Official for use of the dwelling as a Family Daycare Home. A motion was made by Commissioner Hodgson and was seconded by Commission Inman to approve item 1.

2 Item #1 Ebony Pittman Page 2 10 NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 1 BROCKWELL HODGSON HORSLEY INMAN OLIVER REDMOND RIPLEY RUCINSKI RUSSO THORNTON WEINER ABSENT By a vote of 10-0, the Commission approved item 1 by consent. The applicant Ebony Pittman appeared before the Commission.

3 Item #2 Matthew Alves Conditional Use Permit 2445 Brush Creek lane District 6 Beach February 12, 2014 DEFERRED An application of Matthew Alves for a Conditional Use Permit (Home Occupation / firearm sales and gunsmithing) on property located at 2445 Brush Creek Lane, District 6, Beach. GPIN: A motion was made by Commissioner Hodgson and was seconded by Commissioner Horsley to defer the item. 10 NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 1 BROCKWELL HODGSON HORSLEY INMAN OLIVER REDMOND RIPLEY RUCINSKI RUSSO THORNTON WEINER ABSENT By a vote of 10-0, the Commission deferred item 2.

4 Item #3 Alicia Inman Conditional Use Permit 2173 Old Pungo Ferry Road District 7 Princess Anne February 12, 2014 CONSENT An application of Alicia Inman for a Conditional Use Permit (Home Occupation) on property located at 2173 Old Pungo Ferry Road, District 7, Princess Anne. GPIN: CONDITIONS 1. Approval for onsite private wells, septic systems, and wastewater disposal systems shall be obtained from the Health Department. 2. There shall be no more than five (5) attendees at any one time. 3. Hours of operation shall be no earlier than 6:00 a.m. and no later than 10:00 p.m. 4. There shall be no noise disturbance associated with the permitted use to the adjoining property owners. 5. Per Section 234 of the City Zoning Ordinance, there shall be no more than one (1) sign identifying the Home Occupation. Said sign shall be no more than one (1) square foot in area, shall not be internally-illuminated, and shall be mounted flat against the residence. 6. Per Section 234 of the City Zoning Ordinance, no more than 20 percent of the floor area of the dwelling unit and its accessory structures shall be used in the conduct of the activity. 7. The vehicular entrance for the site shall have a concrete driveway apron compliant with the current Public Works Standards for right-of-way improvements and entrances for rural single-family dwellings. 8. The existing above-ground pool and deck must meet all safety requirements provided by the Virginia Building Code. A motion was made by Commissioner Hodgson and was seconded by Commissioner Inman to approved item 3.

5 Item #3 Alicia Inman Page 2 10 NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 1 BROCKWELL HODGSON HORSLEY INMAN OLIVER REDMOND RIPLEY RUCINSKI RUSSO THORNTON WEINER ABSENT By a vote of 10-0, the Commission approved item 3 by consent. The applicant Alicia Inman appeared before the Commission.

6 Item #4 Air Station General, L.C. Conditional Use Permit 1889 Virginia Beach Boulevard District 6 Beach February 12, 2014 CONSENT An application of Air Station General, L.C. for a Conditional Use Permit (Mini-Warehouse/Self Storage) on property located at 1889 Virginia Beach Boulevard, District 6, Beach. GPIN: CONDITIONS 1. With the exception of any modifications required by any of these conditions or as a result of development site plan review, the site shall be developed substantially in conformance with the site plan entitled, AIR STATION STORAGE, dated 12/02/13, as prepared by Martin Engineering Civil Solutions. Said document is on file at the City of Virginia Beach Planning Department. 2. Structures to be located on the site shall substantially conform to the submitted architectural elevation and rendering entitled, EXPANSION FOR AIR STATION STORAGE VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA, dated 11/26/13. Said documents are on file at the City of Virginia Beach Planning Department. 3. Fencing shall substantially conform to the architectural rendering entitled, EXPANSION FOR AIR STATION STORAGE VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA, dated 11/26/13. Fencing materials shall include a stone base and metal spires and rails. 4. The signage as shown on the referenced architectural rendering is not approved as part of this Conditional Use Permit. Signage for the building and site shall meet the sign regulations of the City Zoning Ordinance. 5. The applicant shall meet all requirements of the Purchase Agreement between the City of Virginia Beach and Air Station General, L.C. This purchase agreement is and will remain on file with this Use Permit at the City of Virginia Beach Department of Planning. 6. The applicant shall make all revisions as required by the Chesapeake Bay Board s determination from the January 27, 2014 meeting. 7. As allowed by Section 221(i) of the Zoning Ordinance and based on a finding by the City

7 Item #4 Air Station General, L.C. Page 2 Council that there will be no significant detrimental effects on the surrounding properties by such action, a deviation to the required side yard setback as specified in Section 902(a)(5) of the City Zoning Ordinance is permitted as follows: the southern side yard setback may be reduced to a minimum of 10 1 instead of 35 as required. A motion was made by Commissioner Hodgson and was seconded by Commissioner Inman to approve item NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 1 BROCKWELL HODGSON HORSLEY INMAN OLIVER REDMOND RIPLEY RUCINSKI RUSSO THORNTON WEINER ABSENT By a vote of 10-0, the Commission approved item 4 by consent. Eddie Bourdon appeared before the Commission on behalf of the applicant.

8 Item #5 Erik Homes Special Exemption for Alternative Compliance 404, 412 & nd Street District 6 Beach February 12, 2014 REGULAR An application of Erik Homes for a Special Exception for Alternative Compliance to the Oceanfront Resort District Form-Based Code on property located 404, 412, nd Street, District 6, Beach. GPIN: CONDITIONS 1. With the exception of any modifications required by any of these conditions or as a result of development site plan review, the layout of the site shall be substantially as shown on the site plan entitled 404, 412, & nd Street Conceptual Site Plan, dated January 8, 2014 (Rev.2) as prepared by Land Planning Solutions. Said drawing has been exhibited to the City Council and is on file in the Department of Planning. 2. With the exception of any modifications required by any of these conditions or as a result of reviews under the International Building Code, the dwellings on the site shall be substantially as shown on the drawing entitled PROPOSED 2.5 STORY BRICK AND FRAM SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING PREPARED FOR: Erik Homes, January 9, 2014, as prepared by J. Bengtson and the drawing entitled PROPOSED 2 STORY BRICK AND FRAME SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING PREPARED FOR: Erik Homes, dated January 9, 2014, as prepared by J. Bengtson. Said drawings have been exhibited to the City Council and are on file in the Department of Planning. 3. All interior lot lines shall be abandoned prior to approval of the development site plan. 4. The three existing curb cuts on 22nd Street shall be removed. 5. The applicant shall make all right-of-way improvements as required for 22nd Street and 21st ½ Street and as further required by Public Works / Traffic Engineering and Planning / Development Services Center as part of development site plan review. 6. All walkways, patios, and parking spaces shall be constructed of permeable materials. The interior walkways shall differ in appearance from the public sidewalk along 22nd Street.

9 Item #5 Erik Homes Page 2 7. All landscaping must be maintained in good health. All landscape that fails to grow shall be replaced with a similar type of plant that conforms to the landscaping depicted on the plans referenced by Condition All mechanical equipment, including but not limited to HVAC units, shall be screened yearround by landscaping or fencing. Screening shall, at a minimum, be the height of the equipment. 9. All trash receptacles shall be stored in a manner such that they are not capable of being viewed from the public right-of-way. 10. All landscaping shown in the right-of-way on the plan referenced by Condition 1 shall require an Encroachment Agreement from Landscape Management. If no agreement is reached, said landscaping shall be accounted for within the subject site. All proposed landscaping shall be reviewed and approved by the City Landscape Architect in the Development Services Center. 11. Materials shall substantially conform to the standards submitted by the applicant and included as part of this approval. Said standards are undated and entitled Custom Features, and are on file in the Department of Planning. A motion was made by Commissioner Hodgson and was seconded by Commissioner Thornton to approve item NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 1 BROCKWELL HODGSON HORSLEY INMAN OLIVER REDMOND RIPLEY RUCINSKI RUSSO THORNTON WEINER ABSENT By a vote of 10-0, the Commission approved item 5. Eddie Bourdon appeared before the Commission on behalf of the applicant.

10 Item #6 Claston Lineberry, Jr. Variance to the Subdivision Regulations 5036 & 5040 Blackwater Road District 7 Princess Anne February 12, 2014 CONSENT An application of Claston Lineberry, Jr. for a Subdivision Variance to Section 4.4(b) of the Subdivision Ordinance, which requires that lots created by subdivision must meet all requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance on property located at 5036 & 5040 Blackwater Road, District 7 Princess Anne. GPIN: CONDITIONS 1. The subject parcel shall be subdivided substantially in accordance with the submitted Preliminary Subdivision Plat for the Subdivision of Parcel A ; dated October 2, 2013 and prepared by Bonifant Land Surveys, Inc. Said plat has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file in the Virginia Beach Planning Department. 2. A subdivision plat shall be recorded prior to the approval of the single-family site plan for Parcel A1. A motion was made by Commissioner Hodgson and was seconded by Commissioner Inman to approve item 6 by consent. 10 NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 1 BROCKWELL HODGSON HORSLEY INMAN OLIVER REDMOND RIPLEY RUCINSKI RUSSO THORNTON WEINER ABSENT By a vote of 10-0, the Commission approved item 6 by consent. The applicant Claston Lineberry Jr. appeared before the Commission.

11 Item #7 City of Virginia Beach Stormwater Management Amendments February 12, 2014 REGULAR Ordinances Requiring Planning Commission Action A. An Ordinance to Amend the City Code, Appendix F, (Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Ordinance), Sections 102, 106, 107 and 109 Pertaining to Stormwater Management. B. An Ordinance to Amend the City Code, Appendix B (Subdivision Regulations) Sections 4.2, 5.5, 6.1, 7.1, 7.7, and 8.1 Pertaining to Stormwater Management. C. An Ordinance to Amend the City Code, Appendix C (Site Plan Ordinance) Sections 3, 4, and 7 Pertaining to Stormwater Management. Ordinances Provided For Information and Reference (Planning Commission action not required) D. An Ordinance to Repeal Appendix D (Stormwater Management) of the City Code. E. An Ordinance to Amend Sections 2-275, 2-288, and of the City Code Pertaining to Civil Penalties for Land Disturbing Violations. F. An Ordinance to Amend Sections 30-57, 30-58, 30-61, and of Chapter 30 (Soil Removal and Other Land Disturbing Activities) of the City Code Pertaining to Stormwater Management Virginia Code Revisions. G. An Ordinance to Amend the City Code, Appendix G (Southern Watersheds Management Ordinance) Sections 7 and 8 Pertaining to Stormwater Management. H. An Ordinance to Amend Appendix D of the City Code (Stormwater Management). Pursuant to the Code of Virginia :24 et seq., the proposed ordinance amendments establish a Virginia stormwater management program for land-disturbing activities and adopts the applicable regulations that specify standards and specifications for VSMPs as promulgated by the Virginia State Water Control Board. The proposed amendments are part of an initiative to integrate the existing City of Virginia Beach stormwater management requirements into a unified stormwater program. The proposed stormwater management program is intended to facilitate the submission and approval of plans, issuance of permits, payment of fees, and coordination of inspection and enforcement activities into a more convenient and efficient manner for both the City of Virginia Beach and those responsible for compliance with these programs. The primary regulations for the new stormwater management program will be in the amended Appendix D of the City Code, entitled Stormwater Management. Additional regulatory components of the program will consist of amendments to Chapters 2 and 30 of the City Code, the Southern Watersheds Management Program, Chesapeake Bay Preservation Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance, and Site Plan Ordinance. All of these proposed amendments are being

12 Item #7 City of Virginia Beach Stormwater Management Amendments Page 2 provided to the Planning Commission; however, a recommendation to the City Council from the Commission is required only for the proposed amendments to the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance, and Site Plan Ordinance. Those three amendments are attached. Comments within the ordinances summarize the purpose of each of the changes. A motion was made by Commissioner Hodgson and was seconded by Commissioner Thornton to approve item NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 1 BROCKWELL HODGSON HORSLEY INMAN OLIVER REDMOND RIPLEY RUCINSKI RUSSO THORNTON WEINER ABSENT By a vote of 10-0, the Commission approved item 7. Kay Wilson appeared before the Commission.

13 Item #8 Vanguard Landing Conditional Change of Zoning Conditional Use Permits 2016, 2020, & 2036 Princess Anne Road District 7 Princess Anne February 12, 2014 REGULAR An application of Vanguard Landing for a (A) Conditional Change of Zoning (AG-1 & AG-2 to Conditional B-1A) and an application of Vanguard Landing for (B) Conditional Use Permits (Housing for the Disabled, Commercial Kennel, Assembly Use, Indoor Recreational Facility, Outdoor Recreational Facility, Horses for Hire, Horses for Boarding) on property located at 2016, 2020 & 2036 Princess Anne Road, District 7, Princess Anne: GPIN: ; ; ; PROFFERS PROFFER 1: The Property, when developed, shall be developed in substantial conformity with the conceptual site plan entitled Conceptual Master Plan of Vanguard Landing, Virginia Beach, Virginia, prepared by MSA, P.C., and dated September 30, 2013 (the Site Plan ), a copy of which Site Plan has been exhibited to the City Council is on file with the Department of Planning. PROFFER 2: Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first newly constructed building developed on the Re-Zoning Parcel (and subject to receiving all applicable governmental approvals and authorizations) the Applicant will construct or bond a publicly-accessible pedestrian pathway (the Pedestrian Pathway ) along Princess Anne Road, substantially as shown on the Site Plan. The Pedestrian Pathway will be located either within the public rightof-way or on the Property. PROFFER 3: The freestanding sign located on the Property in proximity to Princess Anne Road shall be in substantial conformity with the freestanding sign depicted on the Site Plan. PROFFER 4: The architectural design of the buildings constructed on the Re-Zoning Parcel, when developed, shall be consistent with a modern rural style, including elements (such as roof dormers and cupolas) depicted on a conceptual exhibit entitled Vanguard Landing, Conceptual Images for

14 Item #8 Vanguard Landing Page 2 Master Site plan, prepared by Burgess & Niple (the Architectural Exhibit ), a copy of which Architectural Exhibit has been exhibited to the City Council and is on file with the Department of Planning. No building permit will be issued for a building on the Re-Zoning Parcel until an elevation for such building has been submitted to and approved by the Director of Planning as consistent with this Proffer. PROFFER 5: In conjunction with the approval and recordation of a subdivision plat consolidating the Property into a single parcel, and subject to any applicable governmental approvals and/or acceptance, the Grantor shall cause twenty-five feet (25 ) more or less of the western portion of the Property to be dedicated to the City for the construction of traffic and pedestrian improvements along Princess Anne Road. PROFFER 6: Further conditions may be required by the Grantee during detailed Site Plan review and administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City Agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements. CONDITIONS 1. With the exception of any modifications required by any of these conditions or as a result of development site plan review, the property shall be developed in substantial conformity with the conceptual site plan entitled Conceptual Master Plan of Vanguard Landing, Virginia Beach, Virginia, prepared by MSA, P.C., and dated September 30, 2013 (the Site Plan ), a copy of which Concept Plan has been exhibited to the City Council is on file with the Department of Planning. 2. With the exception of any modifications required by Building Code, the architectural design of the buildings constructed on the property related to the Conditional Use Permits for Housing for the Disabled, Outdoor Recreation Facilities, Indoor Recreation Facilities, Commercial Kennel and Assembly Uses, when developed, shall be consistent with a modern rural style, including elements (such as roof dormers and cupolas) depicted on a conceptual exhibit entitled Vanguard Landing, Conceptual Images for Master Site Plan, prepared by Burgess & Niple, a copy of which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Department of Planning. No building permit shall be issued for any building for the Conditional Use Permits until an elevation for such building has been submitted to and approved by the Director of Planning. 3. All signage, freestanding or building, related to the Conditional Use Permits for Housing for the Disabled, Outdoor Recreation Facilities, Indoor Recreation Facilities, Commercial Kennel and Assembly Uses shall be consistent, in terms of style and materials, with a modern rural and coastal county style, reflective of the exhibit referenced in Condition #2 above,

15 Item #8 Vanguard Landing Page 3 and shall be submitted to the Director of Planning for consideration and must be approved by the Director prior to issuance of a sign permit. 4. Horse shows, open to the public, are limited to four (4) per calendar year. 5. Commercial concerts, music audible at any property line, and outdoor paging systems shall be prohibited. 6. All outdoor lighting shall be directed in toward the site and any pole lights shall not exceed a height of 14 feet. 7. All animal waste shall be disposed of in a lawful manner. Horse pastures shall be fenced so that no animal can be within 50 feet of the existing ditch creek along the eastern portion of the property. A motion was made by Commissioner Horsley and was seconded by Commissioner Russo to approve item NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT BROCKWELL HODGSON HORSLEY INMAN OLIVER REDMOND RIPLEY RUCINSKI RUSSO THORNTON WEINER ABSENT By a vote of 10-0, the Commission approved item 8. Bob Miller appeared before the Commission on behalf of the applicant. Sue Rolik appeared before the Commission with concerns related to construction activity, safety and screening.

16 Item #9 Northampton Executive Center Conditional Change of Zoning 1300 Diamond Springs Road District 4 Bayside February 12, 2014 DEFERRED An application of Northampton Executive Center for a Conditional Change of Zoning (B-2 Community Business District to Conditional A-36 Apartment District) on property located at 1300 Diamond Springs Road, District 4, Bayside. GPIN: ; A motion was made by Commissioner Hodgson and seconded by Commissioner Horsley to defer item NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 1 BROCKWELL HODGSON HORSLEY INMAN OLIVER REDMOND RIPLEY RUCINSKI RUSSO THORNTON WEINER ABSENT By a vote of 10-0, the Commission deferred item 9.

17 Item #10 City of Virginia Beach Comprehensive Plan Amendments Historic Kempsville Area Master Plan February 12, 2014 REGULAR An Ordinance to Amend the Historic Kempsville Master Plan by deleting Appendix 3 and revising the text of the plan pertaining to drive-through facilities. Below is a listing of the revisions to the Historic Kempsville Area Master Plan (adopted by City Council on January 24, 2006). The page(s) of the plan document referenced each of the items listed below are provided after this page. Plan Cover replacement of graphic and replacement of Draft with Adopted. All Pages revision of page footer, inserting Area in Historic Kempsville Area Master Plan and replacing Draft with Adopted. Page 8 under the Floodplains section, revision of last sentence to replace minimum 1 foot elevation with minimum 2 foot elevation and deletion of and must carry flood insurance. Purpose of revisions is to ensure consistency of this section with the various amendments to the City Code pertaining to floodplains as adopted by the City Council on November 26, Page 10 under the Architectural Landmarks and Styles section, replacement of page number referencing Appendix 4 from 123 to 65. Page 19 under the Issues section, deletion of last sentence pertaining to former mosquito control property, as this issue is now resolved. Page 25 under Land Use Concept section, replacement of page number referencing Appendix 4 from 137 to 79. Page 26 under Conceptual Village Plan by Quadrant section, replacement of page numbers referencing Appendix 4 from 138 to 142 to 80 to 84. Page 27 under Architectural Fabric section, replacement of page number referencing Appendix 4 from 144 to 86. Page 28 under Adoption of City Zoning Ordinance Amendments and Other Ordinances section, deletion of Copies of the proposed amendments and new ordinances are found in Appendix on page 35 to page 112 and addition of City Council has adopted these amendments, and further information concerning these provisions is found in Appendix 3 on page 53. Page 30 in the last sentence, replacement of page number referencing Appendix 4 from 145 to 87. Page 53 Insertion of the following text at the top of the page: On January 24, 2006, City Council adopted the Historic Kempsville Area Master Plan, along with ordinances to amend the City Zoning Ordinance to allow for implementation of the goals and recommendations of the Historic Kempsville Area Master Plan (Ordinances 2915 through

18 Item #10 City of Virginia Beach Comprehensive Plan Amendments Historic Kempsville Area Master Plan Page ).The City Council also amended the Official Zoning Map by the designation and incorporation of the Historic Kempsville Area Overlay District, formally designating the area of Historic Kempsville for regulatory purposes as set forth in the City Zoning Ordinance. Please refer to the City Zoning Ordinance (Appendix A of the City Code) Articles 1, 9, and 22, for regulations applicable to the B-4K Historic Kempsville Area Mixed Use District and the Historic Kempsville Area Overlay District. Pages 53 through 111 Deletion of all text after the paragraph being added. Deleted content consists of the draft ordinances mentioned in the paragraph being added. Pages 113 through 145 Renumber as pages 54 through 87 Addition of pages 88 through 92 as Appendix 5 - Acknowledgements and References. A motion was made by Commissioner Hodgson and was seconded by Commissioner Horsley to approve item NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 1 BROCKWELL HODGSON HORSLEY INMAN OLIVER REDMOND RIPLEY RUCINSKI RUSSO THORNTON WEINER ABSENT By a vote of 10-0, the Commission approved item 10. Clay Bernick appeared before the Commission.

19 Item D1 City of Virginia Beach Comprehensive Plan Amendment North General Booth February 12, 2014 REGULAR Dave Redmond: Mr. Secretary, would you call the next agenda item please? Bob Thornton: The next item is D1. This is a request to amend the Comprehensive Plan by adding Suburban Focus Area (SFA) 9, North General Booth Boulevard Corridor, amending SFA 4, Virginia Aquarium and Owls Creek District, adding land use guidance for SFA 9, and revising the Policy Document. Dave Redmond: Ms. Phillips? Why don t we take about 5 seconds while folks get a chance to filter out. Okay, thank you Ms. Phillips. Jeryl Phillips: Okay. Good afternoon Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission. The item you have before you today is a proposed plan amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to amend Suburban Focus Area 4, in part, and to establish Suburban Focus Area 9 to be called the North General Booth Boulevard Corridor. This amendment has been requested by City Council to offer land use guidance for the North General Booth Boulevard Corridor. It amends Suburban Focus Area 4, the Virginia Aquarium and Owls Creek area, and introduces Suburban Focus Area 9. It creates a new boundary for SFA 4 that includes the area subject to the adopted Virginia Aquarium and Owls Creek Area Master Plan only. And no policy recommendations are changing, and it creates a new Suburban Focus Area 9, offering general recommendations for the entire corridor and sites specific recommendations for two sites, 9.1 and 9.2. This is the map that is in the Comprehensive Plan today (pointing to presentation on screen), as it pertains to Suburban Focus Areas, and in particular. I wanted to point out Suburban Focus Area 4 areas. This is the general area we are referring to. I m going to skip ahead a little bit from my presentation this morning. This is the area that the proposed amendment would pertain to. It is that portion of North General Booth Boulevard or General Booth Boulevard between Birdneck Road and Dam Neck Road. This is an aerial view of that corridor (pointing to PowerPoint). It is predominately a wooded corridor along the road frontage. Then I am going to skip ahead to the general recommendations for the corridor. And this corridor is a unique gateway to the Oceanfront given its natural conditions. The general recommendations have been proposed for the corridor would be that future development along it be AICUZ compatible, low intensity, non-residential uses that complement the environs, and in particular, respecting Red Wing Park and the neighborhood surroundings; to retain as much open space and natural vegetation as possible along the Boulevard frontage; to incorporate landscape features such as berms and buffers when site redevelopment does occur along the Corridor; that access be controlled there will be no direct access from General Booth Boulevard Corridor because it is a controlled-access designated roadway in the Comprehensive Plan already); to maintain or enhance the existing pedestrian infrastructure network, and where feasible, to

20 Item #D1 City of Virginia Beach Comprehensive Plan Amendment North General Booth Page 2 utilize regional or multi-site stormwater facilities. There are two sites that are called out with this Suburban Focus Area. Site 9.1 is where the two campgrounds along General Booth Boulevard are located. On the left side is Holiday Travel Park and on the right side, the KOA Campground. Now these sites are called out currently in the Comprehensive Plan in Suburban Focus Area 4, which pertains to the Virginia Aquarium and Owls Creek Area. Because these campgrounds bear no relationship directly, and were not part of the Master Plan that was prepared for the Virginia Aquarium and Owl Creek area, we have proposed a housekeeping measure to move those down into this new Suburban Focus Area. However, the policy recommendations that are currently in the Comprehensive Plan in Suburban Focus Area 4, as it pertains to these sites, are recommended to remain the same. They have been there since the plan was adopted in The second site is Site 9.2, and that is situated as a triangular parcel between Oceana Boulevard and General Booth Boulevard and Eaglewood Drive. The site specific recommendations are again that future uses should be AICUZ compatible, lowintensity, non-residential uses including an office campus, neighborhood-serving retail, which could interpreted as retail that complements the surrounding neighborhoods, serves the surrounding neighborhood, and no residential or hotel uses. Again, reemphasizing the general recommendations for the entire corridor - to retain general naturally vegetated buffer along the Boulevard; that vehicular access be restricted, meaning only allowed from Oceana Boulevard or Eaglewood Drive and not on General Booth Boulevard; and that a sidewalk be continued along the east side of Eaglewood Drive from Oceana Boulevard to the entrance of the Red Wing neighborhood; and to maintain the existing pedestrian path between Eaglewood Drive and General Booth Boulevard that is there today that provides a nice convenient walk access. This amendment is important, and in so far as it provides specific recommendations in the Comprehensive Plan that are otherwise more general today as part of the suburban area of the Comprehensive Plan. And I ll be happy to take any questions. Dave Redmond: Okay. Are there any questions for Ms. Phillips? Mr. Ripley? Ronald Ripley: The discussion we had this morning about this terminology, neighborhood serving retail, and what we are approving doesn t say that. What we re approving says retail that complements the entrance to Red Wing neighborhood and entrance to Red Wing Park. Jeryl Phillips: Right. Ronald Ripley: I think that clears up some discussion we had this morning. Where this neighborhood serving you said you kind of came up with that terminology? Jeryl Phillips: My word trying to capsulate summary of this. That is why I stated here this afternoon retail that would complement. Ronald Ripley: Is that meant to be in conflict with what you re asking us to approve?

21 Item #D1 City of Virginia Beach Comprehensive Plan Amendment North General Booth Page 3 Jeryl Phillips: No. What s in front of you is what is to be considered. What is in this drafted text amendment. Ronald Ripley: This is the PowerPoint presentation only? Jeryl Phillips: That s my PowerPoint. Ronald Ripley: Just for information only. I got it. Okay. Thank you. Jeryl Phillips: I apologize if I steered it in another direction trying to capsule summary though. Dave Redmond: No apologies necessary. Are there any other questions? Mr. Thornton? Bob Thornton: In the write up on page 11, you talk about the recommendations for the research center at Owls Creek. In that section, let me make sure that I m reading it right. You are proposing to keep page 12 recommendations includes the word retail and restaurants, the second line the prominent corner of General Booth and South Birdneck Road will be a continuation of retail. So the word is not ambiguous, it just says retail. My concern about this is if you were to agree to take the word neighborhood serving out and just leave it retail, I would be perfectly okay with what you have here. Because you re moving some of this Jeryl Phillips: Okay. Bob Thornton: Because you re moving some of this property. Now again we know because of Navy, some restrictions on the property is not going to be retail anyway, but one of the things that concerns me is that term is not in our code per se., If it said B-1 retail or B-2 retail where it is clearly defined, I would be okay. My suggestion would be just to remove the word neighborhood serving and just make it retail. Just let it be retail. It s all got to be rezoned anyway. Jeryl Phillips: Again, I apologize for my capsule summary on the slide. What you need to be considering is the text amendment language under recommendations for former SPCA site. It says where consistent with AICUZ policy, attractive high quality low intensity, non-residential uses including office in a wooded campus like setting, or retail that complements the entrance to the Red Wing neighborhood and the entrance to Red Wing Park. That is the language that you are considering. So I think that is consistent to what you are considering. So, I think that is consistent to what you re suggesting is that it stay retail. Bob Thornton: Possibly. Jeryl Phillips: Okay.

22 Item #D1 City of Virginia Beach Comprehensive Plan Amendment North General Booth Page 4 Bob Thornton: I m not convinced yet. But thank you. Dave Redmond: Are there any other questions? Mr. Inman? Mike Inman: Yes. On page 15 that we re talking about SFA 9.2 recommendations and it uses the word, it says, attractive, high quality, low intensity. What is low intensity? Is that defined anywhere? What does it mean? Jeryl Phillips: Mr. Whitney, I can tell when we update the Comprehensive Plan, we are going to need to put some close attention on our glossary and not speak in planner speak as we go through that. Low intensity as opposed to a very intensive land use. Mike Inman: You can give me some examples to help me out, low intensity, high intensity? How about a shopping center? Jeryl Phillips: And it is not the same as density, so I don t want to confuse the two. Jack Whitney: Smalls shop stores, as opposed to for example big box, large shopping center. Mike Inman: Food Lion right, that sort of thing? Is Food Lion a low intensity? Jack Whitney: The intensity is a function of the size, square footage, traffic impact, that sort of thing. Generally, a low intensity is a smaller footprint with lower traffic volumes coming and in and out of it, typically in a scale similar to the surrounding area. Dave Redmond: I think, however, there are some restrictions here that prevent something like a shopping center mainly AICUZ restrictions and some easements and some other things, so that may be some examples of that definition, but I m not sure how applicable they might be to one or more of these sites. Bob Thornton: Those deal more with 9.1. This is specifically 9.2. There are two parcels included in this change, and I m not concerned about 9.1. I think we understand that there are restrictions that deal with that way more than your ordinance does but 9.2, we know is going to be looked at soon. I just don t want to do anything today that would prejudice that. That is my concern. Jeryl Phillips: let me look to the zoning slide. This whole area both sites 9.1 and 9.2, are AICUZ restricted from a noise standpoint. This is not an accident Zone 1 or 2. It is a clear zone. But, our AICUZ ordinance will apply. There may be other easements, etc. that apply to 9.1 that may not apply to 9.2 but I am not readily familiar with those.

23 Item #D1 City of Virginia Beach Comprehensive Plan Amendment North General Booth Page 5 Dave Redmond: Is there anyone else? Bob Thornton: I can t see it on 9.2. You keep it right where you had it. What is the current zoning of the top half of 9.2? There it shows there. The yellow is AG and the brown is what? Jeryl Phillips: The yellow is AG-2, the red is B-2, and right under it is B-2. Bob Thornton: Okay, so you already got a portion of it B-2; so, I guess my point is I don t want us to do anything today that causes the AG portion of it to not at least not be able to be looked at as B-2. There is already B-2 there. So, for us to change it to something that is not defined. If you had in your definition B-2 we would be okay, but you haven t defined retail. You called it low impact neighborhood retail. Jeryl Phillips: We don t refer to zoning districts in the Comprehensive Plan because the Comprehensive Plan in and of itself does not rezone property. Bob Thornton: Okay, I just want to make sure we don t do anything to violate what s there. That is my concern. Dave Redmond: Mr. Inman? Mike Inman: I think I can help Mr. Thornton a little bit. But first of all the Comprehensive Plan as I understand it, is a guide. It is not a zoning district. So, it is a guide for planning and zoning. But it is not the law, so to speak. And so it says it is recommending low intensity, and it says non-residential uses including those things, not excluding everything else. It includes those things, but it includes other things as well, so those are not the exclusive types of developments that can occur on that site under the Comprehensive Plan. Jeryl Phillips: Mr. Inman? Mike Inman: is that right? Jeryl Phillips: I m sorry. Mike Inman: Is that a correct assumption? Jeryl Phillips: Correct, and in the text amendment however, there is some language that is exclusive, that falls at the end, and it says residential or hotel uses are not recommended for this site, again, because of the AICUZ restrictions. Mike Inman: Right. Okay.

24 Item #D1 City of Virginia Beach Comprehensive Plan Amendment North General Booth Page 6 Jeryl Phillips: The part in front of that correct. Mike Inman: Thank you. Dave Redmond: Is there anybody else? Mr. Hodgson? Jeff Hodgson: Has there been any input from the stakeholders around this new boundary you are creating? Jeryl Phillips: I have received some phone calls since you considered this matter and deferred it in December. I have received some phone calls from residents in Red Wing who have been reviewing the amendment material that has been posted on our website. And have asked questions just to understand what the amendment is because it has several moving parts. No concerns with the amendment were expressed. There was a desire to see the wooded corridor retained along the frontage of General Booth. That particular individual is particularly interested in maintaining the existing vegetation, not that the site should be developed or not developed, but that was the main thrust of that conversation. I have not received any other phone calls expressing an opinion one way or the other. There has not been a public information meeting in the community. I ve just been receiving phone calls and responding to them. Dave Redmond: Did anybody make an effort say to in reference to the Virginia Aquarium has a board. A lot of people who have been involved in that have been in that for many, many, many years. That is obviously impactful for them. Even in the most cursory way, I would think a telephone call, a letter from some input from that organization. There are some major land owners around there. I would think at least they would be consulted as part of that. We have a church that has been operating in a shopping center for a couple of years that finally realizes that it is supposed to have a Conditional Use Permit. The sign sits outside in front that place for 30 days. They don t have a sign for 30 days, and in as so much I can tell, that s not been that done here. That just strikes me as kind of funny; so, I m curious. Has there been any kind of information or is it just kind of just stick an ad in the back of a newspaper and then we talk about it in this environment. I think that outreach kind of thing has to be done. That is my view. We talked about this morning. Can you illuminate me a little about that? Jeryl Phillips: Sure. There has been no direct outreach from the part of the Planning Department beyond posting the proposed amendment materials on our website as we always do, but then you plan amendment and fielding phone calls. As so far as the aquarium, because there are no proposed changes to Suburban Area 4 as it pertains to recommendations, those recommendations reflect the adopted the Virginia Aquarium/Owls Creek Area Plan. There has not been any direct outreach there. Nothing is supposed to be changing about that plan.

25 Item #D1 City of Virginia Beach Comprehensive Plan Amendment North General Booth Page 7 Dave Redmond: Does anybody else have any questions for Ms. Phillips? Mr. Russo? Phil Russo: Yes. Okay, as I understand it, SFA 9 is from Dam Neck basically to Rudee Inlet Bridge? Jeryl Phillips: No. It would. Phil Russo: S. Birdneck. Jeryl Phillips: It would begin at S. Birdneck down to Dam Neck Phil Russo: So what we ve done is carved out SFA 9.1 and 9.2 so there subsections. Jeryl Phillips: They are sites within the SFA. Phil Russo: Within the SFA. Jeryl Phillips: Suburban Focus Area 1, which is the Shore Drive Corridor, if I m correct, has multiple sites, likewise identified so we followed suit in that format. Phil Russo: Okay, and what I m wrestling with is one of the general recommendations looks like for SFA 9 is to preserve the existing wooded corridor on General Booth Boulevard as a greenway leading to the Virginia Aquarium, the Oceanfront Resort Area, and then the recommendations for the former SPCA site says retain as much natural vegetation on General Booth Boulevard as possible, and it seems like when you carve out 9.2, you re more or less limiting any development, because any vegetation on that site specifically since it is carved out, I would think, would be limited from development. You want to retain under these standards, it seems like you would want to retain that, it that is possible. And that is what I am wrestling with, and I think Mr. Redmond was talking about earlier today is questions about the plan. What I m saying is on other portions of General Booth Boulevard, it looks like the outline is just limited to the Boulevard itself, and any other areas outside that are not within those requirements. Jeryl Phillips: Okay, if I can try to respond to that. The boundaries that we are showing here on this general map were intended to reflect the frontage on both sides of the corridor. The site - I m having a little trouble with the term being carved out, so I want to make sure that I am clear. Site 9.1, which includes the Holiday Travel Park on the west side and the KOA Campground on the east side, are currently referred to as site 4.1 and Suburban Focus Area 4. Phil Russo: Okay.

26 Item #D1 City of Virginia Beach Comprehensive Plan Amendment North General Booth Page 8 Jeryl Phillips: Nothing is changing other than giving them a new number and the recommendations for that site of two parcels are coming forward. They are not being carved out. They are a part of the Suburban Focus Area. It s just that specific recommendations already existed for those two parcels in the Comprehensive Plan, and site 9.2 is being provided with more specific recommendations beyond the general that apply to everything that touches General Booth Boulevard, the frontage, the corridor, should we draw the line on the corridor? Phil Russo: Well, and my point is it calls for the corridor, General Booth to preserve the existing wooded corridor as a greenway leading to the aquarium. And I think when you develop the site within 9.2, I think you re limiting the ability to remove any vegetation, any trees under these general recommendations, as I see it. I guess it is just a matter the way I m interpreting what these guidelines are calling for and what is within the SFA. Jeryl Phillips: Perhaps. I think what you might be wrestling with is how much of the vegetation in site 9.2 should be retained. What constitutes a sufficient buffer to the peak along the corridor? These are the type of things we are going to be wrestling with interpretation,without getting to overly specific in the Comprehensive Plan that s been to general. Bob Thornton: That picture right there shows me, and if you were to go back at it later, you re taking away a substantial amount of the frontage along General Booth Boulevard that will restrict vegetation. That doesn t show it. That doesn t show it. That s a pretty clean picture. The one that you just had, that one shows that little long skinny piece to the right of the triangle that s going to have a tree removal in position placed on it, and so what you will end up with, I mean from a practical standpoint is you re going to have a hard time developing that little piece behind it. I meant that s the facts. Jeryl Phillips: I would caution you not to interpret the red lines on this map to be a specific depth into a parcel. The intent of the red lines are to indicate that this Suburban Focus Area applies to General Booth Boulevard, both sides not to some specified depth, but in general, the frontage of General Booth Boulevard. That is why you see a little bit overlap here. There is nothing intended by that overlap. It is not to scale, and you don t see it on here because we re trying to zoom into 9.2, which is the parcel boundary of those two parcels. Bob Thornton: I understand. I fully understand. If you were to draw that line on there, it restricts the removal of vegetation. It would go down through the right hand third of that parcel. And include most of the little tiny piece of the bottom. But for all intents and purposes, it is not going to be affected by this anyway. I m only concerned about the northern portion of 9.2 that is owned by private citizens. That is my concern. Jeryl Phillips: Let me just point out again, in the text amendment, it reads retain as much natural vegetation along General Booth Boulevard as possible.

27 Item #D1 City of Virginia Beach Comprehensive Plan Amendment North General Booth Page 9 Bob Thornton: And you all get to interpret this? Jeryl Phillips: Along with you. Bob Thornton: Thank you. Dave Redmond: Any other questions for Miller? Phillips? What did I say? I said Miller. I m sorry. He left. Bob Thornton: He is still here, as he is next to speak. Dave Redmond: Anybody? Are there any other questions? We threw a lot of questions at you this morning and today. It s not you. So, thanks for bearing up with us. Jeryl Phillips: You re very welcome. Dave Redmond: Okay. Thank you. Bob Thornton: Bob Miller has signed up to speak. Dave Redmond: Next speaker. I jumped the gun Bob Thornton: Bob Miller has signed up to speak. Dave Redmond: To jump the gun, here is Mr. Miller. Welcome Mr. Miller. Robert Miller: Bob Miller with MSA. I m a professional civil engineer. I m hesitant to even come here to speak to you, but I m going to do it anyway, not because it shouldn t be done but because it needs to be done. The automobile dealership which is the elephant in the room was presented to staff about a year ago. And we worked with Karen Prochilo for four or five months, probably not quite a year. I am blurring that a little to try to get into position to apply for a rezoning, which would be what some of what your discussion has been. And part of this property, and I can, if you go back to the zoning map please? It is a little hard to see, but see that line right there (pointing to PowerPoint)? That is City-owned property where the SPCA was. This is the private piece that Mr. Thornton was just talking about. So, that basically is where this property is. We applied to be able to purchase the entire thing including the City piece, and working with Karen and working down through a lot of details, up to about last August we met with City Council people, and were asked to meet with the residents of Red Wing. We did meet with that neighborhood civic league, and also the church across the street and some of the other community activities there, which were the only local people that are adjacent to us. So, we did do what more or less you asked. We were thinking we were going through a rezoning

28 Item #D1 City of Virginia Beach Comprehensive Plan Amendment North General Booth Page 10 process. At a point, City Council decided that it was appropriate to change the Comprehensive Plan. That began in August. It is now the following February, and the reason why the Comprehensive Plan has to be changed in my interpretation, and it was only on this site, I don t know why it has to go all the way where it went north and south, and I m just going to let that be where it is in order for us to perhaps to move to the rezoning, which would follow this. We can t go forward without resolving this matter because of the direction of City Council. And just let me make a point. All of this development between Dam Neck Road and this site is already developed. As you know, if you drive down there, it is commercial, restaurants, storage buildings. And on the other side is the McLeskey property, which in large is already developed. Then you come to the park, than you come to, what s the name of that road? Progress, forgive me, I should know the name. Prosperity, and again, there are residential communities back there. If you go up, and I m not skipping that community there, it is already there. I think there is a dental office right in there, and two commercial activities up at Birdneck Road. All of those things are already there. That s not life, and I think Jeryl has been correct. We re not changing any of that stuff. So just to quickly wrap up, and I don t want to speak specifically about the automobile dealership. The other idea was an office park. And we met with the residents. The office park would have approximately an 80,000 square foot building. You want me to stop now? And it would generate a tremendous amount of traffic at 8:00 am to 5:00 pm as an office building would. There is no need for office, as Corporate Landing is, unfortunately, an example, where a brewery was recently proposed and accepted. And an automobile dealership does not have that traffic event every day. We would not have any entrance on General Booth Boulevard, and again, forgive for being anyway too specific. I apologize. I ll stop and answer and let you ask any questions. Dave Redmond: Are there any questions? Mr. Ripley? Ronald Ripley: Mr. Miller, as it is written in this proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, as it speaks specifically to this particular property, are the general terms workable with you? Robert Miller: We are going to ask to have it rezoned B-2. I mean part of it is already B-2, the City owned piece. And we will ask that the entire piece to be B-2. That is what we will ask. There will be signs put up. We will go through all that process for a rezoning separate from this activity. Ronald Ripley: You didn t answer my question. My question is do you think the way it is worded here is workable what you will apply for? Robert Miller: I have a great degree in engineering. I took two years of Latin and my mother wanted me to be a doctor. I not a linguist, but I sat where you sit, and I would interpret it. That we met with the civic leagues. We talked to the people who are in the adjacent areas. If they